M.r^/^n'^«' 



^>^md 



.f^'^^r^Af\^r\A 






Aa'^A^.O.'a.A^a: 






Mp^mm 



^"^^f^^m^^:'^ 



:A,AA 






UBRk^rf OF CONGRESS. 



"NITED STAl' 



*/ l^AP^r^^A' 






^^Aa.AA 



'Aa^^^aa, 



£f'«»*:?r?^v^v*^v^ 



-*^AAAaaa 



■ -^^ >^ -■■,-: .rv 



^i-^^ 



^AA,/^ 









^^Av'^aaAa; 






'aAaaa 



AAA*,-A,ii 



■/^AA'i A 



AAA^ 



AAaaa^^' 






s.^^^^qAa/^^AaA, 



/^•o>,^„c■o■o'a 






^A^0kM 



^^m^,mm 






sAa>.„,'^A*sA-aAa/ 




-=s- 




HELL AND DAMNATION. 



THE THEORIES OF ANNIHILATION, PURGATORY, 

AND FNIVERSALISM DISPROVED ; AND THE ORTHODOX DOCTRINE 

DEMONSTRATED. 



BY THE 

REV. (;. H. HUMPHREY, 

PASTOR OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BIRMINGHAM, 
PITTSBURGH, PA. 



f 




ROCHESTER, N. V. : 
The Earnest Christian'" Office. 87 State Street. 




Entered, aecoidiiig- to Act of Conjirrss, in the \ car iSTi. by 

BENJAMIN T. ROBEKT^. 
In the Ottlce of the Librarian of Cov^vv>s. at VVashinuton 



This book sent by mail,, postage paid, for ;")() cents. 
Address — 

REV. G. H. HUMPHEEY, 

Pittshurf/h, {South Side). Pn. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 



« THE THBORIES OF ANNIHILATION, PURGATOKY 

AND UNIVERSALISM DISPROVED Am) THE ORTHODOX DOCTRINE 
DEMONSTRATED. 



..^jmi - 



p,v BY/THE 

REV. G. H. ^HUMPHREY, 

PASTOR OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BIRMINGHAM, PITTSBURGH, PA. 




ROCHESTER, N. Y. : 
* Earnest Christian Office," 87 State Stkbit 



TT 



h 




CONTENTS. 



PAGES 

Pkeface, 5-7 

CHAPTER I. 

THE SCRIPTURAL MEANING OF THE WORD "HELL." 

Its Derivation — Hades — Uffern — Sheol — Qelienna — 

Tartaros, 9-19 

CHAPTER 11. 

THE LOCALITY AND NATURE OF HELL. 

A Place — Degrees of Punisliment — Body — Mind — 

Literature, 20-31 

CHAPTER III. 

THE THEORY OF ANNIHILATION. 

Theory New — Materialists^ — Texts Explained — Literature 32-48 
CHAPTER IV. 

THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

The Fathers — The Scriptures — Eight Arguments 

Against — Literature, 44-61 

CHAPTER V. 

THE JUDGMENT TO COME. 

God's Government — Analogy — General Resurrection — 

Fin^V, . 62-72 



IV. CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER VI. 
ENDLESS RETRIBUTION INFERRED FROM THE NATURE OF MAN. 

Mr. Alger — Punishments of Nature — Associations — 

Sinners Forever, 73-85 

CHAPTER VII. 

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT PROVED FROM SCRIPTURE. 

Theodore Parker — Texts Explained — Literature . . 86-98 
CHAPTER VIII. 

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT PROVED FROM THE DOOM OF THE 
FALLEN ANGELS, AND FROM THE INFINITE EVIL OF SIN. 

Experience — Name of Satan — Personal Devil — " Sin 

exceeding sinful " — Intense, '99-114 

CHAPTER IX. 

THE DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL PUNISHMENT CORROBORATED 
FROM HISTORY. 

Belief General— The Fathers— Gibbon, . , . 115-118 

CHAPTER X. 

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT AND THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. 

Justice — Goodness, • 119-126 

CHAPTER XI. 

THE CONCLUSION OP THE WHOLE MATTER. 

There is a Hell — Should Rouse to Activity — Should be 

Preached — Salvation for All on Same Conditions, . 127-132 



PREFACE. 



It is not probable that every reader will be of the 
same mind about the doctrine discussed in this little 
volume. Some will be positive believers and some 
positive disbelievers in it. Others will occupy a middle 
ground. But to every reader we would make the fol- 
lowing suggestions : 

1. Everybody should have, or seek to have, spiritual 
stamina enough to bear the title of this book without 
wincing or getting angry. This title is used for two 
reasons : First, Because it is exactly the subject of the 
treatise ; and secondly, because there is need of reaction 
from the sickly mawkishness that prevails on this sub- 
ject. If there is a hell, why not speak of it under its 
Scriptural names ? Why nickname it ? If men are 
" in danger of eternal damnation," why not tell them so 
plainly ? It is positively wicked to be more nice than 
God and more modest than Jesus Christ. If there are 
terrible truths to tell, out with them in words as terrible 
as the truths themselves. 

2. Some will find, or think they find, mistakes in 
some of the pages that follow. Doubtless there are 
errors of judgment, or fact, or both. And the printer 



6 PEEFAOE. 

will probably add some of typography. Some margin 
must be left for human fallibility. A few errors here 
and there will not invalidate the entire reasoning. The 
lines of argument are not all interdependent. Some 
allowance should be made also for difference in mental 
susceptibility. What will appear weak to one may ap- 
pear strong to another. Different arguments have a 
different value for different individuals. It is to be 
hoped that no argument is adduced that will not have 
weight with somebody. 

3. The writer would respectfully ask the reader to 
examine the treatise clear through. How often do men 
pretend to form judgments of books without really 
knowing their merits or demerits ? Reviewers some- 
times look at the title-page, glance at a paragraph here 
and there, and then sit down to write a most profound 
and oracular criticism on it ! Readers not infrequently 
look over the table of contents, and perhaps a chapter 
or two, until they come to something that conflicts with 
their notions, when down goes the book anathematized 
as a miserable sophistry. And the "liberalist" is as 
apt to do this as any one else. Now, it matters not, 
dear reader, what you may think of any merely human 
opinion ; but it is important that you should know 
what is true concerning the world to come. It is worth 
your while to give this matter serious thought. You 
cannot undo eternal realities with a pooh-pooh. In 
order to help the earnest student, I have appended to 



PEEFACE. 7 

several chapters references to some of the best works on 
those departments or phases of the subject. I trust 
many of those works will be read and studied. This 
treatise makes no pretensions to originality. The reader 
may find some new arguments. He will recognize many 
old ones in new garbs. He will miss some that have 
been in vogue. This humble compendium is sent forth 
with a prayer that the Holy Spirit may bless to many 
the truth it contains. 

Pittshurgh, Pa., May \0t\ 1876. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 



CHAPTER I. 

The Scriptural Meaning of the Word ^'- HelV 

Words are like trees — they have roots, trunks and 
branches. Like trees, they sprout, grow, blossom, ripen, 
and decay. Like trees they are grafted. And they 
exhibit every method of grafting — cleft-grafting, splice- 
grafting, side-grafting, saddle-grafting, and, of course, 
tongue-gvdSlmg, Like trees, they send out new branches, 
lose others, and eventually wither, branches, trunks, 
roots and all. But even then some foreign idea will not 
unfrequently germinate on the decaying trunk, as the 
mistletoe thrives on a lifeless oak. 

Words that at one time had many meanings, often 
come to have but one meaning. Some words signify 
less at present than they did formerly; and some signify 
more. Words that have long had only a good meaning 
sometimes get into bad company, fall from grace, and 
come to have only a bad meaning. Formerly, the knave 
was an innocent lad ; now he is a full-grown rascal. 
Formerly, the villain was an inoffensive farmer ; now he 
is a dreaded scoundrel.* Formerly damnation meant 
s\ui^\Y condemnation (Rom. xiii, 2 ; 1 Cor. xi, 29 ; 2 Thes. 
ii, 12)f ; now it conveys exclusively the most terrible 
idea suggested by any language. 

If words lose their old meanings and. acquire new 



* Trench, on the Study of Words, p. 56. 
f Hodge and Barnes, in loc. 



10 HELL AI^D DAMISTATIOIS". 

ones, and if many words grow sterner, harsher and 
uglier as they grow older, it may be suspected by some, 
and hoped by many, that the word '^ hell " has a differ- 
ent meaning to-day from that which it had in the past. 
In other words, that the idea attached to it at present 
is an excrescence rather than the essence of the term. 
It is to endeavor to ascertain the truth on this matter 
that we turn our attention in this chapter. The word 
" hell " is from the Anglo-Saxon. It is derived from 
the verb helan^ which means to conceal. The German 
word Holle has a similar origin. It is a cross between 
the verb hiillen, to cover, and the noun Hohle, a cavern. 
The English word holloiu is a modified form of this word. 
It is somewhat remarkable that coelum^ the Latin word 
for heaven, is derived from kolTick^ a Greek word which 
means to be hollow. A striking instance of extremes 
meeting. 

The derivation of the English word " hell,'^ as given 
above, corresponds exactly with that of the Greek 
word aidrfQ or aLdm- Hades is the invisible world. 
Souls when they descended there became J!fa7^6s, Shades. 
To the ancients it was a region where departed spirits 
were " silent in darkness." 

Among the ancient Greeks, Hades had different signi- 
fications at different times. In " Homer " the name is 
never applied to the place, but to Pluto, the person who 
ruled over it. In the later writers this is reversed. 
Hades was divided into two parts — Elysium and Tarta- 
ros. The latter was a region of gloom, darkness and 
wretchedness. The Furies dwelled there. There Pluto 
was fierce and inexorable. Black sheep, offered with 
the face turned away, were the sacrifices of this god. 
Corresponding to the Hades of the Greeks was Orciis 



HELL AKD DAMNATION. 11 

among the Latins. In the sixth book of the Aeneid, 
Virgil described it as a place of gloom {tristis)^ terror 
{terrihile)^ sorrow and suffering {luctus et uUrices).^ 
Among the Romans, Orcus was often called Inferims^ 
from infer, below. The Welsh TIffern is probably de- 
rived from this word. To an active people like the 
Greeks, a region of inactivity such as Hades was re- 
garded as a place of extreme misery. To an ambitious 
people like the Romans, a land of silence, such as Orcus 
must have been contemplated with the greatest abhor- 
rence. 

But the etymology and mythology of the word is 
after all of comparatively little consequence. By far 
the most important inquiry on this subject is: Does the 
word " hell " in Scripture ever signify a place of future 
torment ? Universalists answer in the negative, and 
Evangelicals in the affirmative. 

The Scriptures contain four words that are rendered 
" hell " in the Authorized English Version, Luther's 
Translation, the Douay Bible, and almost all other pop- 
ular versions. The words referred to are Sheol, Hades, 
Gehenna and Tartaros. 

Sheol is a Hebrew word. It occurs sixty-four times 
in the Old Testament. In King James' Translation it 
has been rendered pit three times, grave thirty times 
and hell thirty-one times. The etymology of the word 
is somewhat uncertain. Gesenius contends that it is 
from shay-al^ and means cavity, Fiirst seems to agree 
with him. But the majority of the best lexicographers, 
both old and recent, derive the word from the verb shaal 



* Aeneid, book vi, 264—281. 



12 HELL AND DAMKATIO]^. 

to demand. The proper name, Saul, had the same root, 
because he was ashed of the Lord. 

It is admitted that, in the great majority of cases, 
Sheol signifies the tinder world^ without reference to con- 
dition. In many places where the word has been rendered 
hell^ the idea of the original would have been conveyed 
more correctly to us had it been rendered grave. But 
did the ancient Jews ever connect the idea of conscious 
misery with the term Sheol ? It is quite certain that 
they did. This will appear from three considerations : 
Flrst^ From the history of the Jewish nation. That na- 
tion lived more than four centuries among a people who 
believed in the immortality of the soul, and in rewards 
and punishments after death. Herodotus has given this 
testimony.* The position of Warburton and others, who 
have denied this, has been disproved conclusively by 
the more recent investigations of Lepsius, Roth, Wilk- 
inson and Baron Bunsen. The catacombs of Egypt 
speak of a heaven and a hell. The creeds of the 
Pharaohs, preserved in mystic figures, contain the doc- 
trine of future retribution. Now, Moses became a 
teacher of the Israelites. This Moses had been been 
educated in the city of the Pharaohs — at the University 
of Egypt. "He was learned in all the wisdom of the 
Egyptians," How then could it be that Moses knew 
nothing of a future state with rewards and punishments ? 
If Moses knew of this doctrine, can there be any doubt 
that he imparted this knowledge to the children of 
Israel? And even if Moses had said nothing about it, 
how eould the people help learning this as well as any 
other doctrine of their Egyptian neighbors ? But if they 



* Book ii, Section 123. 



HELL AKD BAMlSTATIOK. 13 

h^d this Jcnowledge^ how could they avoid associating 
the idea of condition with the word by which they 
d-esignated the abode of the dead ? 

Secondly, To the Hebrew mind Sheol conveyed more 
than the thought of the mere tomb in which the body 
had been laid. When they wished to speak of the 
burial-place alone, they used other words " bor " and 
*'kebed," e. ^., Prov. xxviii, 17; Gen. xxiii, 9; Gen, 
XXV, 9), just as we use vault, tomb, and sepulchre in a 
more limited sense than grave. The first occurrence of 
the word Sheol almost excludes the idea of burial (Gen. 
xxxvii, 35). Jacob believed Joseph had been devoured 
by wild beasts; and yet he implied that he had gone to 
Sheol, by which he could not certainly refer to his body 
in the grave, but to his soul in the abode of spirits. 

That the ancient Jews regarded the departed as con- 
scious beings is evident from such expressions as 
" gathered to hi« people,'^ Gen. xxv, 8 ; from their view 
of man as constituted of body and soul (Gen. ii, 7 ; Ec- 
xii, 7); from their tradition of the translation of Enoch 
(Gen. V, 24); and from that part of their law which pro- 
hibited necromancy. Deut. xviii, 11. Now if Sheol in 
oluded the state of the soul as well as the place of the 
body, and if the soul was believed to be conscious and 
active after death, how could the Jews, with their views 
of justice in this life, but believe in the misery of the 
wicked in the other life ? 

Thirdly, Many expressions in which the word Sheol 
is used show that the ancient Jews did attach the idea 
of misery or punishment to it. If we consider such pass- 
ages as Ps. ix, 17; Prov. v, 5 ; ix, 18; xxiii, 14; Num. 
xvi, 30-33 ; Deut. xxxii, 22 ; 1 Kings ii, 6-9 ; Ps. xlix, 
14-15 ; Is. V, 14, in the light of their contexts and that 



14 HELL AKD DAMKATIOIS', 

of tbe preceding consideration s, we cannot, bnt by tbe 
most unnatural interpretation^ ^PP^^ them to anything: 
but future punishment. Take for instance Ps. iXylV; 
" The wicked shall be turned into bell, and all the na- 
tions that forget God." To be turned into the gi^ave, or 
spirit-world is Bothing peculiar to tbe wicked. The 
righteous, young and old, rich and poor, go there a^ 
well. No one will contend that the Sheol into which 
those who forget God are tunietJ is precisely tbe same 
as that ^for which Job longed whcD he said : " O that 
thou wouldst hide me in Sheol." — -Ch. xiv, 13. Thus^ 
the education of the Jewish people; their yiews of the 
condition of departed spirits ; and the way in which 
they frequently used the word &heol, lead us to believe 
that they associated with it a condition of misery. 

The same remarks will, of course, apply to the Greek 
word Hades wherever it occurs in the Septuagint as a 
translation of Sheol in the Hebrew. But this word oc- 
curs twelve times in the New Testament, Does it meao 
there, as it does generally in the Old Testament, the 
grave, or the under-world ? In some cases it undoubt- 
edly does, as in Acts ii, 27—31, and probably in 1 Cor, 
XV, 55 and He v. i, 18 ; xx, 13. But in the majority of 
cases the idea of suffering and punishment is plainly 
connected with this word. Sometimes it means the 
power of Evil, as in Mat. xvi, 18. Id Mat. xi, 23-24, we 
find these words: ^^And thou, Capernaum, which art 
exalted unto heaven shalt be brought down to hell 
(Hades): for if the mighty works which have been done 
in thee had been done in Sodom, it would have remained 
until this day. But I say unto you, that it shall be 
more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of 
judgment than for thee." Hades is here put as the op- 



HELL AKD DAMKATIOK. 15 

posite of heaven. It is represented as a condition than 
which the judgment on Sodom will be more tolerable. 
And this is in the future^ as we may see, not only from 
the tense of the verb and the reference to the judgment, 
but also from the fact that Sodoni and Capernaum can 
not stand side by side to exhibit their comparative guilt 
and suffering except in the future. The terms of this 
comparison have not been fulfilled already. In the par- 
able of the rich man and Lazarus we read that he lifted 
up his eyes in hell (Hades), being in torment. Luke 
xvi, 23. In this account the burial of the body, and the 
condition of the soul, are distinct things. Here it is im- 
possible to make Hades mean simply the sepulchre. In 
three distinct sentences it is described as a place of 
torment. Vers. 23, 24, 25, 28. 

Another word translated " hell " in the New Testament 
is yshva (Gehenna). The history of this word may be 
given in a few sentences. It is derived from the valley 
of Hinnom^ or the son of Hinyiom. It was situated 
south of Jerusalem. It was at one time a well- watered, 
verdant and delightful place. In course of time, the 
idolatrous Israelites made it the place of sacrificing their 
children to Moloch. From some characteristic of that 
worship it was called Tophet, or Topheth, according to 
some, from " houf," to spit out, according to others, 
from "hof," a drum. King Josiah defiled the place by 
making it a depository of filth. Criminals were taken 
there to be executed. The carcasses of criminals and 
the dead bodies of malefactors were brought to this 
place and burned. A continual fire was kept up there. 

Now it would be the most natural thing in the world 
for the Jews to give Gehenna a spiritual meaning. It 
would certainly be as natural for them to make the val- 



ley ef Hinnom a type of hell as to make Jerusalem a 
type of heaven. Such passages as Is. xxx, 33, would 
lead them to make this transfer: "For Tophet is or- 
dained of old ; yea, for the king it is prepared ; he hath 
made it deep and large : the pile thereof is fire and 
much wood : the breath of the Lord, like a stream of 
brimstone, doth kindle it." Is. Ixvi, 24 ; Josh, xv, 8 ; 
xviii, 6; Neh. xi, 30; 1 Kings xi, 7; 2 Kings xvi, 3: 
Jer. xxxii, 35; Is. xxx, 33; Jer. vii, 31; 2 Kings 
xxiii, 10. 

From the nature of their education the Jews could not 
but associate physical and spiritual defilement in the 
Gehenna ; being originally a place of physical punish* 
ment, and defilement would inevitably come to be re- 
garded as a figure of uncleanness and retribution. Be- 
sides, the oldest Rabbinical writer, as is generally ad- 
mitted, used the word Gehenna to designate the future 
world of woe. And as Gesenius has remarked, the He* 
brews supposed that demons dwelt in this valley. With 
these considerations before him, who can believe that the 
Jews in the time of Christ did not use the valley of 
Hinnom, Tophet, or Gehenna, as an equivalent to Tar- 
tarqs, or the spiritual world of woe ? 

That Christ did not use the word Gehenna in the lit- 
eral sense is plain from his manner of using it. He uses 
it in regard to offences that the Jewish law did not pun- 
ish capitally. Mat v, 22, 29, 30; xviii, 9. He em- 
ployed it to designate punishments that affect the very 
soul. Mat. X, 28 ; Luke xii, 5» He denounces it as 
the penalty, not only of outward, but of inward sin, 
such as hypocrisy. Mat. xxiii, 15-30. In the only in- 
stance where an inspired writer has used this word it is 
beyond a doubt used figuratively. James iii, 6. The 



HELL Al^B BAMI^ATIOK. 17 

valley of Hinnom did not certainly set any man's tongue 
on fire. 

It has been said that, although Philo and Josephus 
believed in future retribution, they did not use the word 
Gehenna when writing of it.* What of it ? Must we 
find precisely the same words in different authors before 
we can believe that they wrote on the same subjects and 
received the same doctrines ? Philo was born and edu* 
cated in Alexandria where his mode of thought and the- 
ological vocabulary would be quite different from those 
of the Jews that had received their training in Palestine* 
Josephus, aiming at a classic style, avoided Hebraisms ; 
and Gehenna is a Hebraism. For that matter, the wri- 
ters of the IN'ew Testament, with the exception of James, 
have not used the word Gehenna, although they have said 
much on future retribution. Josephus does not use the 
expression " kingdom of heaven," that was so common 
with Christ ; but that certainly does not prove that 
there is no such a kingdom. 

Josephus calls the government of Israel until the cor- 
onation of Saul a theocracy, Neither Christ nor his 
apostles have used this word. But that certainly does 
not prove that they denied that Jehovah was King, be- 
tween the Exodus and the monarchy. In a copious Ian* 
guage like the Greek, no one was confined to a single 
term when writing on so familiar a subject as rewards 
and punishments. 

In 2 Pet. ii, 4, the word " hell" is a translation of the 
Greek word " Tartaros," or rather of a denominative verb, 
which means to cast into Tartaros. What then was 
Tartaros ? In the Greek classics the name was applied 



^Thayer Theology of Universalism, p. 389. 



18 HELL AND DAMI^ATION. 

to the lower parts of Hades. Occasionally it was ap- 
plied to the under-world generally, when the gloom of 
that region was specially in the writer's mind. It is 
always used as the opposite of the happy Elysium. It 
was the place where Jupiter took vengeance on his ene- 
mies. It was here that Ixion, Tantalus, and Sisyphus 
were doomed to everlasting punishment. And it is evi- 
dent that Peter is using the word in the ordinary sense. 
He does not sanction the details of mythology ; but he 
undoubtedly retains and sanctions the central idea of a 
place of retribution. In the context he speaks of terrible 
visitations, such as tbe deluge and the overthrow of 
Sodom. The angels that sinned were delivered into 
chains^ and darkness^ to be reserved unto judgment. 
Peter must then have regarded Tartaros as a place of 
misery. 

This closes our discussion of the four Scriptural words 
that have been translated " hell." The word Sheol 
generally means the abode of the dead, including that of 
their souls, as w^ell as that of their bodies. In the light 
of the history, training, and laws of the Jewish nation, 
we cannot well avoid the conclusion that the idea of 
wretchedness and punishment was sometimes attached 
to the W'Ord Sheol. Wherever the word Hades is a 
translation of the Hebrew Sheol, as in the Septuagint 
and Acts ii, 27, 31, it bears the same meaning as its 
original. In the New Testament it signifies, in a few 
instances, the " dominion of death " and the "power of , 
evil," but most generally the " place of torment " and 
degradation. Gehenna, as used by Christ, designates a 
state or place of retribution. Tartaros is a dark prison 
where the fallen angels await their doom. 

There is a hell. Sheol is not a mere sleep. Hades is 



HELL ANiy DAMISTATIOK. 19 

not a mere dream-land. The fires of Gehenna were not 
extinguished with the departure of the Romans from 
Jerusalem. Tartaros was not all a Grecian myth. It 
exists esse7%tially to-day. 

Literature. — Josephus' Extract Concerning Hades, et al. Kit- 
to's Encyclopedia, Art. " Hades." Moses Stuart's Future Punish' 
meni. Furst's and Gesenius' Lexicons, Art. " Sheol. " Taylor 
Lewis," in Lange's Commentary on Gen. xxxvii, 85. A. Eoyce's 
Uni'&ersalism a Modern Invention. Campbell on the Four Gospels, 
vol. i, pp. 253-291. W interns Worterhuch, Art. " Hlnnom." Rob- 
inson's Biblical Researches,'' vol. i, pp. 239, 273. Dr. Craven's 
" Excursus on Hades/' in Lange's Eevelation. 



CHAPTER 11. 

The Locality and Nature of Hell, 

Hereafter we will not use the word hell in the general 
sense of Sheol, nor in the sense of Hades in its classical 
and Septuagint import, but in the sense of Gehenna and 
Tartaros, and of Hades, when it signifies a place of tor- 
ment. With this understanding we will proceed to 
make some inquiries concerning the locality and nature 
of hell. 

Many who admit the existence of a hell, deny that it 
is a place. It is maintained that it is merely a state or 
condition. Its only locality is the human breast. It is 
what a man is, and not where he is, that constitutes his 
hell. The kingdom of darkness, like the kingdom of 
heaven, is an eternal kingdom. The words which Milton 
puts in the mouth of Satan will be received as correct 
on this subject : " Which way I fly is hell ; myself am 
hell." 

Now we admit that character is, so to speak, the foun- 
dation of hell. It is confessedly the sinful and guilty 
state of the soul. The remorseful breast will be a fiery 
furnace to consume its possessor. An accusing conscience 
will be an horrible tempest in the mind. Yes, hell will 
be an inward state of misery. Sin within will be a Ge- 
henna-fire. 

But is there ^^o place to which those whose souls are in 
a state of condemnation will be confined ? There cer- 
tainly is. It is astonishing that this should be denied. 
This is only a sly method of denying that there is a hell 



HELL AND DAMNATION. , 21 

of any kind. That which has no locality has no reality. 
That which is nowhere is nothing. 

But it may be asked, "If hell be a place, where is it?" 
No man can tell. Neither the imaginings of Dante and 
Milton, nor the visions of Swedenborg, avail anything to 
throw light on this question. Nothing has been revealed 
on the matter. But it does not follow that because we 
cannot locate hell, it has no locality. No geographer 
can give us the longitude and latitude of Eden. No seer 
can show us where heaven is situated. Nevertheless the 
paradise below was, and the paradise above is, a tangible 
and fixed reality. So it is with hell. Although we can 
not locate it, we know that it has a locality. This will 
appear from the following considerations : 

1. The types or figures of hell — Gehenna and Tarta- 
ros — had a definite locality. Gehenna was a valley south 
of Jerusalem. To the Greek mind, Tartaros was a dark 
prison entered through Cimmeria and Erebos. If that 
which the Spirit of God chose to typify future punish- 
ment had a locality, it is more likely than unlikely that 
that which is typified has a locality likewise. This is 
no demonstration ; but it furnishes some probability in 
favor of our position. 

2. Man, from his very nature, must have some locality. 
As a spiritual being, he must be in space ; and as a mate- 
rial being, he must occupy space. He cannot be nowhere. 
Nor can he be everywhere. The wicked in the future 
world, must, from his very nature, be in some place. If 
that be a place of punishment, it will be hell. 

3. We know that in this world man is a social crea- 
ture. As O. S. Fowler says, he is a " gregarious animal."" 
Bad men seek congenial associates. The wicked go to- 
gether and cling to each other. But we have no evidence 



22 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

that human nature will ever be changed in this particu- 
lar. Man is fundamentally a social being. We will 
take J. Freeman Clarke at his word : " It is so in this 
world, why shall it not be so hereafter too ?"* If misery 
loves company now, why not forever? If "birds of 
feather flock together " in this world, why not in the 
world to come? If sin brings men together on this side, 
why not on the other side of the grave ? But if doomed 
sinners congregrate in the future state, according to the 
promptings of their nature, they will have to be in some 
place. Can the place of such a congregating be any- 
thing but a place of torment ? 

4. The analogy of human practice confirms the same 
position. Governments put their criminals together in 
prisons, penitentiaries and places of banishment. No 
one, unless it be the criminals themselves, finds fault 
with this method. Why then may it not be the 
method of the Divine government to punish the viola- 
tors of its laws ? Is there any absurdity in this suppo- 
sition ? Hell is described in Scripture as an imprison- 
ment and a banishment. But transgressors can no more 
be imprisoned or banished, except in some place, in the 
future than in the present world. 

5. The blessedness of the redeemed in heaven will 
make it necessary that hell should have a fixed locality. 
If, as some would have us believe, heaven and hell have 
no definite locality; if both are only inward states; if 
both may meet and mingle through all eternity, the 
blessedness of the righteous will be greatly diminished 
and jeopardized by such a condition of things. Even in 
this world the presence of the impious and the vile is a 



^Common Sense in Meligion, p. 162. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 23 

burden to the good and holy. How much more so 
must it be when the righteous are made perfect and the 
reprobate have lost every restraint ? The happiness 
and holiness of the redeemed will make the absence of 
the ungodly indispensable. If they must be absent 
from the congregation of the righteous, they cannot be 
indefinite as to place. If there be a place where they 
can never be, does it not follow that there is a place 
where they must ever be ? 

6. The Scriptures contain many expressions which 
cannot but compel every candid reader to believe that 
hell has a locality. The Judge will say in the last day : 
" Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire pre- 
pared for the devil and his angels." — Mat. xxv, 41. The 
word " depart" shows that the wicked will go together 
to be punished. They will go to a place too — to ever- 
lasting fire, " prepared for the devil and his angels. It 
could scarcely be said that God had prepared the in- 
ward state of the devil and his angels. But it could be 
said with perfect propriety and naturalness that God 
had prepared a place for them to be confined in after 
they had themselves made their inward state miserable 
by sin. Hell is called a '' prison " and a " lake of fire." 
Rev. XX, V, 14. Words more expressive of locality 
could not be chosen. As we will prove hereafter, the 
devil has personality. His prison must then have a 
location. And when it is said that death and Hades 
shall be cast into the lake of fire, the evident idea is that 
death and his kingdom shall be confined within certain 
limitations. Our Saviour speaks repeatedly of being 
"cast into hell." Mat. v, 29-30; xviii, 8-9. Can we 
exclude the idea of locality from such an expression as 
this? The word "cast" implies a removal frDm one 



94 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

place to another. And the word '^ Gehenna," which 
Jesus used, could not but convey the idea of locality to 
his Jewish hearers. Our Saviour would not certainly 
leave them under a false impression. Judas Iscariot was 
a son of perdition. John xvii, 12. His destiny was 
woe. Mat. xxvi, 24. But when Judas died he went to 
his own place. Acts i, 25. In Luke xvi, 28 hell is ex- 
pressly called a place of torment. The Greek word 
TOTTog is never used in the sense of moral condition. It is 
sometimes used figuratively to signify occasion or op- 
portunity. But even then the opportunity is viewed as | 
the result of its possessor's situation or position. The 
general idea of the word is a place, spot, locus, regio.* 
The fair inference from these tacts is that hell is a place, 
spot, locality or region of torment. 

But if hell be a place of torment it will again be | 
asked, what will be the nature of those torments ? A 
great deal of impious folly has been written and spoken 
on this subject. Some will have it that the pains of per- 
dition will be almost entirely material or physical. 
Such is the prevailing representation of Medical Art. 
Such too is the delineation of Dante in his Inferno. 
Others fly to the opposite extreme and maintain that 
they will not be material at all, but figurative and spir- 
itual. This is the doctrine of Swedenborg. These two , 
extremes are alike the result of a lack of spirituality. | 
Some natures are so coarse that they cannot conceive of 
any suffering but that which is physical. Others con- 
tend that the torments of hell will be spiritual, simply 
because that to them the word spiritual means the same 



^Liddell and Scott. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 25 

thing as unreal. The word figurative is used as a de- 
ceptive synonym oi fictitious. 

We can have but a faint and very inadequate idea of 
the misery of a lost soul. That, to the full extent, must 
be the terrible revelation of Eternity. But there are 
some general principles underlying the Divine Govern- 
ment and human nature that are unchangeable.* Of 
these we may speak Avith confidence. 

The misery of hell will be the necessary result of un- 
godliness. It will be the inevitable effect of transgres- 
sion as its cause. Hell will be the natural harvest of 
torments which sin must yield. " He that seweth to 
the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption." Among 
the natural consequences of sin and reprobation may be 
mentioned the fellowship of wicked men and unclean 
spirits ; evil propensities and passions unrestrained ; the 
consciences of eternal felicity lost ; and the accusations 
of an awakened conscience. 

In addition to this, God will probably vary in his 
methods or manner of punishing different individuals 
according to his wise, righteous and holy will. It is in 
reference to this that Jonathan Edwards has used the 
word " arbitrary," and Kitto the word " positive." The 
exercise of the Divine prerogative has often been repre- 
sented as wanton, undeserved, and malignant. Some 
have gone so far as to term it " fiendish " and " infernal." 
But in this respect may it not be in the life to come as 
it is in this life ? We find that in this world trans- 
gressors of the same class very often suffer for their 
transgressions in very different ways. None of them 
suffers unjustly. If their sins are equal, their sufferings 
may be equal. And yet they may be very different in 
symptoms, nature and continuance. Three men go in a 



26 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

drinking saloon on a winter evening. They are old 
friends. They have been raised together and very sim- 
ilarly. They go to the saloon with the same motive. 
They all drink the same liquors. They all get drunk. 
They all leave for home at a late hour. One falls asleep 
in a snow-drift and freezes his hands and feet off. The 
second tumbles over an embankment and breaks his 
neck. The third takes a cold that settles on his lungs 
and takes him gradually to the grave. Here are three 
men punished very differently for precisely the same of- 
fense. Who is the punisher in this case ? God, through 
the laws of nature. All were punished, because they 
deserved it. But each suffered a kind or method of pun- 
ishment peculiar to himself, according to the sovereign, 
— as President Edwards would say — " arbitrary" will of 
God. " It is so in this world ; why shall it not be so 
hereafter, too ?" 

The punishment of sin will be in proportion to the sin. 
Christ says it will be " more tolerable " to some than to 
others in the day of judgment. Mat. x, 15; ii, 22-24 ; 
xxiii, 15. The stripes will be in proportion to the know- 
ledge and disobedience. " Unto whomsoever much is 
given, of him shall much be required." — Luke xii, 
47-48. The proselyte of the Pharisee became " twofold 
more " the child of hell than the Pharisee himself. Mat. 
xxiii. 15. Paul says: "As many as have sinned with- 
out law, shall also perish without law : and as many as 
sinned in the law shall be judged by the law." — Rom. 
ii, 12. God will give to every man according as his 
work shall be. Mat. xvi, 27 ; Rom. ii, 5 ; 2 Cor. v, 10 ; 
Rev. xxii, 12. 

It is often asked : How will the lost suffer ? What 
will be the seat of their sufferings ? Will t endur 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 27 

physical as well as mental torment ? The statement of 
a few undeniable facts will answer these inquiries : 

1st. The mind is the seat of suffering. There may be 
life where pain is impossible, as in the plant. As long 
as the mind is asleep — let the sleep be natural or artifi- 
cial, it matters not which — the body cannot be pained. 
Still farther, the mind is the measure of its possessor's 
capacity for suffering. An elephant is much larger than 
a man ; but it cannot suffer as much as man because it is 
not possessed of so much reason. Man has probably a 
heavier body than a fallen angel ; but the angel has ca- 
pacity for greater agonies because of his superior intelli- 
gence. An idiot cannot suffer as much as a philosopher. 
A child cannot suffer as an adult can. It was the great- 
ness of his person that made the sufferings of Christ so 
great. Everywhere and always the mind is the sufferer. 

2d. The mind never suffers but by the use of means. 
It suffers from jealousy, through the affections. It suf- 
fers from regret, through the memory. It suffers from 
remorse, through the conscience. It suffers from discord, 
through the ear; from deformity, through the eye ; from 
a stench, through the nose ; and from bitterness, through 
the tongue. A deranged, nervous system is oftentimes 
the rack on which a man is tortured. Human sufferings 
of all kinds are always mediate, 

3d. Man will possess a mind or soul after the resurrec- 
tion as well as before. This needs no proof to those 
who receive the Scriptures. Philosophy, without the 
Bible, had made this extremely probable. But if man 
will have a mind in the future world, he tnay be made a 
sufferer by it. He will have his conscience there ; he 
may suffer guilt and remorse. He will have a memory 
there ; he may be tormented by regrets. He will have 



28 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

forethought there ; he may be troubled by fears. He 
will have his miderstanding there; it inay turn to be his 
accuser for not having known Him that is true. We may- 
go still farther and say that^ if that mind is at variance 
with God's law, it vnll suffer. And those sufferings will 
be inconceivably great. 

4th. Man will have a body in the future world. And 
that will be a material body too. This is implied in the 
doctrine of the Resurrection. It is this mortal and this 
corruptible that is to arise and put on immortality and 
incorruption. 1 Cor. xv, 58. The resurrection body 
will, no doubt, be very different from our present bodies. 
Our present bodies are called natural. Our future 
bodies are called spiritital. This means simply that 
our earthly bodies are adapted to a natural state of 
existence, and that our future bodies will be adapted 
to a state of existence that is described as spiritual. 
But the natural and spiritual bodies are alike material. 
This is all illustrated and proved in the resurrection 
of Christ. This material body rose from the grave 
and ascended to heaven — changed, it is true, but 
material still. This resurrection was the first fruit 
or pattern of ours. But if man is to have a body, 
there is no absurdity in supposing that he may suffer 
physically in that future world. Nor is there anything 
unreasonable in supposing that he may suffer by fire. 

Chemistry teaches us that we are literally burning, and 
that continually. Our very food is but fuel. Our per- 
spiration, breath and excrements are, scientifically speak- 
ing, ashes. We are our own daily Phoenixes. By far 
the greater portion of the water we drink is oxygen, a 
gas that "revels in combustion." If man in this life be 
but a heap of smothered fire, may he not, under certain 



HELL AND DAMNATIOlSr, 29 

conditions, be a faggot of fire in the world to come? 
Moreover, do we not see that many transgressions are 
punished in this world with burning ? Violate the laws 
of nature in certain ways and infla'in'ination (in flani'ina) 
will set in. What is a fever [ferveo) but a boiling o± 
the blood ? Have we not all heard of St. Anthony's 
fire. Caustics are sometimes applied to disclosed parts. 
Job meant more than a mere figure when he said, " My 
bones are turned with heat." — Job. xxx, 30. It is not in 
the Bible alone that you find hiirning mentioned as a 
punishment on violation of law. You may find it in any 
medical work; and all the jangling schools agree on 
this. Now, if man be naturally combustible ; yea is 
continually in a state of combustion ; and if the infrac- 
tion of law be inflammatory^ how can it be improbable 
that transgressors in the world of woe will suffer from 
literal fire ? 

But it is not only probable from the 'constitution of 
man that he may be on fire ; it is also probable from the 
constitution of nature that he will be in fire. According 
to the fashionable hypothesis of the day, the universe 
originated in a fire-mist. The earth has passed through 
several fiery ordeals. The Ecpyroseis of the ancient 
Greeks were more than mere fancies. The principle of 
spontaneous combustion is still at work in nature. Ge- 
ology teaches that in the centre of the earth there is a 
surging sea of fire more than seven thousand miles deep ! 
The crust of the earth is comparatively thin. According 
to Professor Dana, it is not many scores of miles in 
thickness. It is highly probable that planets sometimes 
explode. It is generally believed by astronomers that 
the Asteroids are fragments of an exploded planet inter- 
mediate in size between Mars and Jupiter. Besides, 



30 HELL AKD BAMKATIOK. 

geology teaches that our atmosphere is becoming more 
and more explosive. During the Carboniferous period 
the atmosphere contained less oxygen and more carbonic 
acid (*' choke-damp") than at present. Oxygen is the 
great burner of the material universe. Chemists tell us 
that if the proportion of the gases in the earth's at- 
mosphere were but YiiYj slightly changed, it would be in 
a blaze in an instant. Just imagine an atmosphere over 
forty-five miles thick, and encompassing the globe, weigh- 
ing about 5,287,850,000,000,000 tons, igniting and ex- 
ploding ! And will any one say this is impossible ? 
The very tendency of nature is in that direction. May 
there not be planet-explosions in the future as well as in 
the past ? 3Iay there not be an Ecpyroseis in time to 
come as well as in time gone by ? May there not be a 
universal^ spontaneous combustion ? May a world that 
began in fire not end in fire, as naturally as the dust of 
man returns to dust ? No man whose mind is not en- 
cased in a foregone conclusion can answer these ques- 
tions in the negative. It is not unreasonable to believe 
what may be, and is likely to be, especially when it is 
asserted by trustworthy authority. 

It has not been our object in the foregoing remarks to 
prove that this world will be made the future world of 
woe. There are passages of Scripture which seem to 
exclude such a supposition. The place of torment may 
be at an immense distance from the globe we now inhabit. 
Should that be the case, how God will convey his ene- 
mies there, we do not know. It is enough for us to know 
that the Omniscient and Almighty can send them 
to their place of banishment as easily and as naturally 
as -he- gathers the swallows in flocks and sends them 
south before the approaching winter. Nor have we 



HELL AND DAMIS^ATIOIS". 31 

made the above observations to convey the impression 
that the sufferings of perdition will be chiefly material 
or physical. They will not be chiefly of that character. 
Many writers, especially of the Catholic Church, have 
misrepresented the true doctrine of eternal punishment, 
by going too far in this direction. As the body consti- 
tutes but a very small portion of a man, so the physical 
sufferings of the lost must be small compared with their 
spiritual sufferings. The Great Soul, created in the 
image of God, and yet guilty of rejecting God — that 
will be the centre of the tortures. The language of the 
Bible on this subject is oftentimes, no doubt, highly 
figurative. Our object has been to show that that lan- 
guage may not be all figurative. Hell 'inay contain as 
real a fire as that into w^hich Shadrach, Meshach and 
Abend-nego were cast. At least it is certain that as 
man w^ill possess a body in the future state, he will suf- 
fer bodily punishments, if that body be the abode and 
instrument of sin. 

Literature. — Augustines's City of God, b. xxi. Hitchcock's 
Geology ; ch. on " Geology and Revelation." McCosh's Divine 
Government, pp. 75-107. Chalmer's Astronomical Discourses, 
Discourse vi. Butler's Analogy, Part i, ch. ii. Taylor's Physical 
Theory, Emerson's' Essay on Compensation. Youmans' New 
Chemistry, last ed., pp. 180-189. 



CHAPTER m. 

The Theory of Annihilation. 

Notwithstanding its apparent self-confidence, Univer- 
salism has never been satisfied with itself. It has always 
been shuffling and tossing about, recanting, remodeling, 
rebuilding. Its only fixed furniture has been the dogma 
that no one will be forever in conscious misery. Those 
few who, in the early centuries, believed in the final res- 
toration of all, the devil included, put that consumma- 
tion at an immense distance in the future. But when 
this doctrine was revived in New England, it was a 
very difierent thing from that which Clement and his 
great pupil, Origen, taught. It was the doctrine of the 
founders of American Universalism, that every trans- 
gressor sufiers all his punishments in the present life. 
This world is hell. At death everybody goes imme- 
diately to paradise. It was not long, however, before 
this position was abandoned. It became the general 
admission of Universalists that many are destined to 
sufier; — some after death — the amount to depend on the 
amount of sin practised and cherished. Still farther on 
we find the period of "chastisement" extended. At 
the present time the most intelligent adherents of this 
creed hold that the future torments of the wicked will 
be so long that they may well be termed endless, eter- 
nal, everlasting, or forever. 

But, not very many years ago, a substitute was pre- 
pared to take the place of this px'otean doctrine of uni- 
versal restpration. Universalism has always scorned 



HELL AND DAMKATIOISr. 33 

literalism in the interpretation of Scripture. To it 
everything was " poetic," " figurative," or " parabolical." 
But figures or no figures, the conviction lurked in many- 
minds that the words that describe the doom of those 
who die impenitent, contain so fearful a meaning that 
they cannot be made to tally w^ith the conclusions of 
Universalism. At the same time it was predetermined 
that they should not mean a conscious and endless 
misery. To meet the difficulty, some writers resolved to 
abandon the "figurative" position, and resort to the 
literalism that had been condemned so unsparingly. 
The result of this new departure was the theory gen- 
erally know as Annihilationism. In England it had 
been known for some time previously as Destruction- 
ism. This doctrine means simply that the punishment 
of the ungodly shall be extinction of being. 

Among the adherents of this belief there has been 
every diversity and shade of opinion. Some have 
asserted that the ungodly will be annihilated at death. 
Others have held that they will be reserved for the sen- 
tence of the judgment-day and be exterminated imrae- 
dliately, or soon thereafter. Some have maintained that 
they will endure conscious misery for a long time, and 
then sink gradually into eternal non-existence. Horace 
Bushnell says " they will be forever approaching anni- 
hilation without ever reaching it fully." He compares 
this approximation to the asymptote curve.* 

This reaction from Universalism indicates two things: 
1. That men will eat their own words — flying from 
fi2:urativisni to literalism — rather than receive the 



" Vicarious Sacrifice," p. 337. 



34 HELL AISTD DAMT^ATIOJST. 

Word of God in its simplicity; and 2. That some peo- 
ple had rather be nothing than be followers of Jesus 
Christ. 

We will not waste time to disprove the notion that 
the ungodly are annihilated at death. Holy Writ speaks 
of conscious misery of departed souls so frequently ; 
foretells a general judgment and resurrection — a word 
that unmistakably implies the previous existence of the 
dead — so graphically \ mentions the separation of the 
"cursed" from the "blessed" so plainly ; and refers to 
subsequent " torments" and " anguish" so unquivocally 
that it is inconceivable how any one who pretends to be- 
lieve it, can believe an immediate annihilation after 
death.* This is a more grim and doleful creed than that 
of the French Revolutionists : Death is an eternal sleep. 
It is vain to combat such as these with arguments based 
on Scripture. 

But there is still another reason why our attention 
shall not be turned to this phase of the annihilation 
theory, viz : It • is no longer held by any respectable 
author or body of people. The view of the most ad- 
vanced annihilationists of the present day is, that the 
wicked will rise to the judgment and be annihilated 
sooner or later afterwards, fit is to refute the doctrine 
in this aspect of it that we make a few observations. Of 
course, if it is disproved in this feature of it, it will be 
disproved in every other. 

1. The fact that this theory is comparatively new is a 
presumption against it. We do not by this mean that 
antiquity is always a proof of the truth, any more than 
that novelty is a proof of the falsity of a doctrine. Old 



*See Deut. xviii, 11 ; Luke xvi, 19-31 ; 2 Pet. ii, 9 ; Mat. xxv, 32. 
t H. L. Hastings' ''■ Retribution/' pp. 77, 153. 



HELL AKD DAMJSTATIOK. 35 

doctrines may be false and new ones may be true. Nev« 
ertheless the presumption is necessarily in favor of the 
old and against the new. It is right that the claims of 
the usual should be respected. The pVQSum.'ption was 
against the Reformation Doctrine of Justification by 
Faith. So it was against the cause of the American colo* 
nies. There must always be special reasons to overcome 
this adverse presumption. In the case of the annihila- 
tion scheme no such reasons appear. It rests on no self- 
evident principle. Its conclusions are certainly not dem,- 
onstrated. Nor is its recognition demanded by any 
linguistical, critical, theological, metaphysical, ethical or 
moral necessity. It is a Satanic intruder among the doc- 
trinal sons of God that find their parentage in the Bible. 
Scarcely a student of the Scriptures lias ever thought of 
such a scheme until quite recently. The alleged indica- 
tions of it in Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and a few more of 
the fathers, are too vague to be relied on, especially as 
the very ones quoted in this connection abound in explicit 
declaration that the punishment of the wicked shall con- 
sist in endless misery. Arnobius however seems to have 
been an annihilationist. The standard authors of ortho- 
doxy, from the Apostolic Fathers down to the Reform- 
ers, scarcely ever refer to a scheme of this kind ; which 
shows that it did not exist during those centuries ; since, 
had it existed, they would have combated it, as they 
did every heresy that came under their observation. 

The Bible has passed through many a period when the 
"literal interpretation" prevailed. But the most obsti- 
nate literalist never discovered the annihilation of the 
wicked in it, until, made desperate by unequivocal words 
on the one hand, and by a determination to reject " eter- 
nal punishment" on the other, a few annihilationists fell 



36 HELL AND DAMKATIOK. 

on this hypothesis as a last resort. The novelty of the 
theory, in conection with the motives and circumstances 
of its construction, furnishes a very strong presumption 
that it is not in the Scriptures. 

2. While annihilation takes the Bible literally, it does 
not profess to be literally true ! To annihilate means to 
reduce to nothing. Modern science asserts that matter 
is indestructible and that force is imperishable. Regard 
his body as matter, and his soul as a force — as Dr. Car-- 
penter regards life — and man is still such a being as 
cannot be annihilated. It is true that forces are convert- 
ible ; and it may be contended that the force called soul 
may be transformed into something else, and that that 
transformation may be taken as the end of its conscious 
or vital existence. But if this force can be converted 
from being a man, may it not — as it will still exist — be 
re-converted into a man the second time ? We are well 
aware that this savors strongly of quibbling. But we 

. must sometimes stoop to conquer the shifts that annihi- 
lationists are compelled to resort to. We do not assert 
positively — as our opponents inconsistently do — that 
matter is eternal. The old Lutheran theologians may 
have been correct when they taught, that at the end of 
the world matter will return to its primeval non-existence. 
But the doctrine that matter and force are indestructible 
affords a far narrower foothold to the annihilation than 
to the orthodox view. Strange, that in these days of 
" correlation and conservation of forces," men should be 
so imscientijic as to talk about annihilation! 

3. As a rule, annihilationists do not believe in the soul 
as a substance different from, and, in same sense, inde- 
pendent of the body. So far they are materialists. 
They hold that the body is indispensable as a condition 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 37 

of consciousness and thought. They will generally ac- 
cept the i30sition of Alexander Bain^ that '^ the physical 
;alliance is the very law of our mental being ; it is not 
contrived purely for the purpose of making our mental 
states known: without it we should not have mental 
states at all.^^* 

Some annihilationists, however, use expressions that 
seem to imply the distinct substantiality of the soul/ 
The Scriptures teach this doctrine plainly, as any one may 
discover who will take the trouble to examine such pas- 
sages as Oen. ii, 7 ; Job xxxii, 8 ; Ec. xii, 7 ; Zech. xii, 1 ; 
Luke xxiv, 39; Rom. viii, 16 ; 2 Cor, xii, 2-4 ; Rev. xxii, 9. 
But if this Scriptural doctrine be admitted, the immortal- 
ity of the soul will be th^ inevitable inference. Immate- 
riality and immortality must go together. If the soul 
be a substance f distinct from the body, it follows that 
it is a swiple substance. But if it be simple, it must be 
indissoluble^ and hence imperishable, since death is dis- 
solution. 

Like Hume before him, Kant holds that while the soul 
may be simple and insoluble, it may yet lose its consci- 
ousness to such a degree as to be to all intents and pur- 
poses non-existent.J But an inert spirit is inconceivable. 
Life must be the essence of a pure soul. Such a senti- 
ment as the above could proceed only fi*om a man who 
failed to see in design any evidence of a designer. § 

But man is a free, moral agent. All thinkers from 



* " Mind and Body," p. 13B. 

f It is scarcely necessary to remind the reader that the word 
substance is here used in the sense of " permanent subject or cause 
of phenomena, whether material or spiriiual." There may be an 
immaterial substance. 

t" Critique of Pure Reason." Bohn's Ed. 245-2J7. 

g Ibid 287-387. 



38 HELL AKD DxiMKATIOlvr, 

Augustine to Hodgey from Origen to Whedon, are essen- 
tially agreed on this. This freedom, as Kant admits, is 
required by the practical interests of morality.* 

But doe« this freedom not necessarily imply immortal- 
ity ? Man was created in the image of Grod. He is a 
reflex of a Divine Ibeing, In some respects that image 
has been disfigured. In other respects it has not been 
marred, and cannot be. As God is^ a spirit, so man has a 
spirit. Must that spirit, like God^s, not be immortal ? 
Like God, too, man is a free person. Can the creature 
lose his free agency any sooner than the Creator lose his ? 
In the words of the author of " Ecce Deus,^" God cannot 
annihilate a moral agent. \ 

Thus the simplicity and freedom of the human soul 
necessarily imply its immortality. But endless being 
may be accompanied by endless w^retchedness. 

4. Punishment consists in pain or suffering of some 
kind, physical or mental. It is so in its etymology. J 

It has been so regarded by civil governments in every 
age. It is so explained in all the dictionaries, Webster 
defines it as " any pain or siifferi7ig inflicted on a person 
because of crime or offence ; especially pain so inflicted 
in the enforcement or application of law." But is anni- 
hilation in itself pain or suffering ? No. It is rather 
the entire absence of anything of the kind. And yet 
annihilationists speak incessantly of extinction of being 
as the punishment of the wicked ! It is self contradic- 
tory as well as contrary to the common sense of man in 



* •' Critique of Pure Reason/' Bohn's Ed., 35. 
f "Ecce Deus,"p. 231. 

X See however " Chips from a German Workshop/' vol, ii^ p. 
254-256. 



HELL AND BAMlSTATIOl^. 39 

every age to talk of annihilation as in itself a punish- 
nient. There eatiiiot be eternal " punisliment" without 
eternal " pain or suffeiing." 

5. We will now proceed to those Scriptural enuncia- 
tions that cannot possibly be made to agree with the 
doctrine of annihilation : ^ 

1. The punishment of the wicked is described as be- 
ing most dreadful and terrific. The Scriptures abound 
in the most appalling descriptio];is of the future world of 
woe. Such words, phrases, expressions, and circumlocu- 
tions have been used as are enough to paralyze the mind 
with horror. i^Tow, if annihilation be the doom of the 
ungodly, these delineations are exiiggerated. An extinct 
being knows no terrors. Annihilation is dreadful only 
before it is inflicted. But the Bible represents the pun- 
ishment of the wicked as being i?i itself terrible. It 
must then be on beings capable of recognizing that 
terror. 

But it may be replied that man dreads annihilation. 

That depends, on his condition. In misery he would long 

for the rest of nonentity. We would like to hear an an- 

nihilationist give a consistent interpretation of Rev. ix, 6: 

" In those days shall men seek death, and shall not find 

it ; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from 

them." C. F. Hudson has given us a quotation fronl 

BeliaFs speech. * 

" For who would lose. 
Though full of pain, this intellectual being ; 
Those thoughts, that wander through eternity 
To perish rather, swallowed up and lost 
In the wide womb of uncreated night, 
-Devoid of sense and motion ?" 



* " Christ our Life," p. 152. 



40 HELL AKD DAMKAT10:N'. 

Why did Mr. Hudson, in fairness to Milton and the 
reader, not give us the immediately succeeding eight 
lines, while he was in the mood to quote ? 

" And who knows, 
(Let this be good,) whether our angyy foe 
(J<in give it, or will ever ? how he can 
Is doubtful ; that Tie never will, is sure ; 
While he, so wise, let loose at once his ire, 
Be like through impotence, or unaware 
To give Ids enemies their wish, and end 
Them in his anger, whom his anger saves 
To punish endless V * 

2. The punishment of the ungodly is described as a 
condition of " tribulation," " anguish," " weeping and 
wailing, and gnashing of teeth." It is called a " place 
of torment^ It is said of those who worship the beast 
and his image that the smoke of their torment ascendeth 
up forever and ever : and they have no rest day nor 
night. Rev. xiv, 9-11. From such expressions as these 
it is undeniable that the punishment of the finally im- 
penitent will consist in conscious misery. An annihilated 
being can know nothing of "tribulation, "anguish," 
" torment," " unrest," " weeping and wailing, and gnash- 
ing of teeth," All these words imply the continued 
consciousness of the lost. 

3. The punishment of the wicked is said to be ever- 
lasting. They will depart into everlasting fire. Mat. 
XXV, 41. Their damnation will be eternal, Mark iii, 29. 
The smoke of their torment will ascend up forever and 
ever. Rev. xiv, 11. Theirs will be an everlasting de- 
struction from the presence of the Lord. 2 Thes. i, 9. 
They will be cast into prison to remain there until they 



* *' Paradise Lost," book ii, 146-159. 



HELL AKB BAMKATIOIsr. 41 

pay their uttermost farthing. Mat. v, 26. Now, the eter- 
nity of hell implies the immortality of its inhabitants. 
The idea of hell centres in the persons that will be in it. 
Hence they will be immortal in endless misery. 

4. Death is never applied to man in the sense of an- 
nihilation. Annihilationists base their argument on 
such terms as "consume," '^ devour," "cutoff," "blot- 
ted out," " burned up," " perish," " lost," " death," 
" destruction," " perdition," and the like, and contend 
that when applied to the doom of the wicked they mean 
total extinction of being. By what authority is this as- 
sertion made ? It is certainly not on the usage of these 
words. It is said that the wicked destroy the earth ; and 
that the world being overflowed with water, perished. 
Rev. xi, 18 ; 2 Pet. iii, 6. Does this mean that the earth 
is already annihilated ? The Psalmist was consumed by 
the Divine anger. Ps. xc, 7. Was he blotted from ex- 
istence ? The words referred to are used in a great many 
instances to describe the destiny of human beings, godly 
as well as ungodly, in the past. Does this mean that 
they are annihilated already f The most ultra annihila- 
tionist will scarcely answer in the affirmative ; the 
" advanced" of this school certainly will not. But if 
myriads have been " consumed," " lost," " slain," 
" killed," " utterly destroyed ;" if they suffered " death," 
" destruction" and " perdition" in the past, and still re- 
tain a vigorous existence, why may these same words 
not be used to describe a future destiny without extinc- 
tion of being ? If the first death was in no case annihi- 
lation, on what ground can it be asserted that the 
" second death" will be annihilation. 

5. The Scriptures teach that there will be degrees in 
the punishment of the wi<3ked. We have shown this 



43 HELL AND BAMNATlOK. 

in the preceeding chapter. But total extinction of being 
is a thins; that will not admit of deo;ees. Should it be 
replied that the degrees refer to the intensity and con- 
scious suffering before annihilation, we answer that this 
does not cover the ground of our objection. 

Annihilation is represented not only as the punishment^ 
but as by far the greater part of the punishment of the 
wicked* This alone is the everlasting punishment. Thus 
the eternal punishment of the ungodly, according to the 
annihilation theory, admits of no degrees— a position 
that violates at once our. inherent sense of justice and 
the plain declarations of Scripture. 

6. Annihilationists assert that death, in the sense of 
non-existence, will be the doom of the enemies of God. 
But the Scriptures teach that that doom will be worse 
than death in that sense or any other. JSTothhig can be 
worse than death but a life of misery. Death is often 
invoked as a welcome deliverer. Job. xiv, 13 ; Rev. vij 
16 ; ix, 6. 

It is said of Christ's betrayer that it had been good 
for him had he not been born. Mat. xxvi, 24. If Judas 
Iscariot is now annihilated, or if he will be annihilated 
after the judgment, this awful denunciation of woe be- 
comes meaningless. But, as Adam Clarke has remarked, 
the words necessarily imply the conscious existence of 
the betrayer, as non-existence is said to be better than 
the state in which he is now found. 

In Heb. x, 26-29, we, are told that he who despised 
Moses' law, died without mercy under two or three wit- 
nesses. But he that hath trodden under foot the Son of 
God is said to be worthy of a sorer punishment still ! 
What can be worse than death^ and a death without mercy ; 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 43 

yea, and a death which, according to most annihilation- 
ists, is a state of tinconscionsness, if not of nonentity-^ — 
what can be worse than this but a conscious existence 
under the condemnation of self and of God ? 

LiTERATURE.-^Dr. W. B. Carpenter on The Correlation of the 
Physical and Vital Forces. Butler's Dissertation on Personal 
Iderdity. McClintock & Strong's Encyclopedia y Art. " Annihila- 
tion. Mattison on The Immortality of the Soul. Bartlett's Life 
and Death Eternal, Warren's Sadduceeism ; a Pefutation of the 
Doctrine of the Final Annihilation of the Wicked. Landis on The 
Immortality of the Soul. The Younger Edwards' Reply to Dr, 
(jhauncy. Prof. Haney on The Impenitent Dead. Locke on The 
Human Understanding, hook, ii, ch. 1, xxiii, xxvii. 



CHAPTER IV. 

The Doctrine of Purgatory, 

Some people denounce most bitterly what they cherish 
most dearly. This is illustrated in some of the tenets of 
the Romish Church. This Church anathematizes 
rationalism, while it is itself full of that accursed thing. 
It is true that its rationalism differs from that which 
overspread Germany in the last century. Unlike almost 
every other, Romish rationalism is traditional. It is a 
mummy embalmed by the decrees of councils, and trans- 
mitted from generation to generation. The doctrine of 
purgatory is a result of rationalism. It was constructed 
to satisfy the apparent demands of reason and feeling. 
Even Comte eulogizes it on account of its reasonable- 
ness,^ That this atheist commends it is in itself a pretty 
strong presumption against its Scriptitralness, 

Universalism is rationalistic ; and the doctrine of pur- 
gatory savors of Universalism. The Catholic believes in 
a limited restoration, and the Universalist believes in an 
vinlimited purgatory. 

The Romish Church teaches that the dead are in one 
of three states, according to their respective characters. 
Those who are Catholics and perfectly holy when they 
die, pass immediately to heaven. Those who die out of 
the Romish Church, go directly to hell. ISTon- Catholic 
children, however, do not suffer so much in this hell as 



* " Positive Philosophy," book v. 



HELL AND DAMNATION, 45 

adults. Their abode is called limbus infantum. Therd 
they must remain forever in a kind of stupor, deprived 
of the fellowship of the redeemed and of the beatific 
vision. But many who are in the church die with sins 
to expiate and pollution to cleanse. These go to purga- 
tory. Catholics differ somewhat in their views of this 
place. Moehler, Cardinal Wiseman and Gousset de- 
scribe it in the main as a state of spiritual suffering. 
But it is popularly regarded as a lake of literal fire. Its 
name in some modern languages signifies this.'^ Books 
^\a'itten for the people sanction the idea that its tortures 
are physical as well as spiritural. Dante's " Purgatory" 
represents the conception which the Church encourages 
in regard to it. 

All Catholics agree that the sufferings of souls in pur- 
gatory may be alleviated and shortened by the prayers of 
the saints, and especially by the sacrifice of the mass. 
The period of confinement there varies. In some cases it 
may be but a few hours. In others, it may continue until 
the day of judgment. If Dante saw correctly, even an 
" infallible " pope was retained there at least twenty- 
four years. f Purgatory is under the power of the keys. 
The priest is said to have an authority over it that re- 
sembles the Governor's power over the prisons of his 
State. He may pardon, commute, or let the law have 
its course, as he sees fit. 

Catholic writers endeavor to prove the existence of a 
purgatory in two ways — from tradition and from Scrip- 
ture. The basis of their tradition is the testimonies and 
practices of the Fathers. Now a few plain statements of 



* Comp. Qer. Fegefener, Welsh purdan. 
f '* Purgatory/' Cauto xix, 94. 



46 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

historical facts will show the utter uncertainty and in- 
sufficiency of this foundation : 

1. The Catholic Church repudiates the Fathers in 
many things. The early Christians believed in a Jewish 
millennium. Augustine taught the doctrines of Original 
Sin, Total Depravity, Moral Inability, and Sovereign 
Predestination. But the Church of Rome disavows 
these doctrines. In the words of Dr. Krauth, it cano- 
nizes and deserts Augustine, and reprobates and follows 
Pelagius.* In a thousand things it has departed from 
the teachings and practices of the Fathers. What con- 
sistency is there in making them the witnesses for pur- 
gatory and ignore their testimony in other matters 
equally important ? 

2. The Fathers contradict themselves and each other. 
Toward the close of his life Augustine wrote a volume 
of Retractions, Had he lived longer he would, no doubt, 
have written many more. Tertullian was at variance 
with the Church on the subject of baptism. Jerome was 
continually changing his views on several important 
matters. Every historian is familiar with the famous 
dispute between Theophilus and Chrysostom. Are men 
who could not agree with themselves and one another 
absolutely reliable witnesses for any doctrine? 

3. The Fathers prayed for all the dead — for those in 
hell, and for those in heaven. They prayed that the 
torments of the former might be alleviated, and that the 
blessedness of the latter might be heightened. Suppli- 
cations were made for prophets, evangelists, apostles, 
and martyrs. They prayed even for the Virgin Mary ! 



* ** Conservative Reformation/* pp. 362, 450. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 47 

Augustine prayed for his deceased mother, although he 
believed his prayer had been answered already.* The 
people prayed for Constantine's soul, although it had 
" ascended to its God." Many such prayers are on 
record. f If Romanists pray for the dead in imitation of 
the Fathers, why not imitate them in every particular? 

4. In the days of the Fathers, the people prayed for 
the dead as well as their pastors. Tertullian admon- 
ished a widow to pray for her deceased husband. Euse- 
bius says that " the people supplicated God with tears and 
lamentations for Constantine's soul." But to-day, as a 
general thing, the priests dp the praying and the people 
the paying. 

5. Those ancieut oblations were not offered to expiate 
the sins, but to honor the memory of the departed. 
They were made to signify that the fellowship of the 
living and the dead still continued. It was Monica's 
dying request that her son should remember her at the 
Lord's altar. Then the oblation was commemorative. 
Now it is expiatory. 

6. The practice of praying for the dead disappears as 
we go back to the Apostolic age. Augustine lived in 
the fourth and fifth centuries. Before him very little is 
said in regard to praying for the dead. The first men- 
tion of it is found in the writings of Tertullian toward 
the close of the second centurj^ As we go back to the 
first century there is absolute silence on the subject. 
The most sanguine Romanist is unable to find a single 
quotation in favor of this dogma in the Apostolic 
Fathers. These Fathers have left us voluminous writ- 



* " Confession," book ix. 

f See Renandot's " Collection of Ancient Liturgies.^ 



48 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

ings. They have said much about death and the state 
of the dead. But they have not said a word about pur- 
gatory, nor in regard to praying for the dead ! Surely, 
if this had been an Apostolic doctrine, the Apostolic 
Fathers would have said something about it. 

Thus, there is fixed a great historical gulf which even 
tradition cannot bridge to convey the doctrinal dives of 
purgatory into the bosom of the Bible and the fellow- 
ship of Christ and his Apostles. The argument from 
tradition lacks di, foundation. It does not touch bottom. 
It fails at the vital point. It is evidently an excresence 
that grew gradually on the Church. At first the dead 
were simply remembered. Gradually prayers came to 
be offered for an increase of their happiness. Very 
naturally the offering of supplications for those whose 
state was doubtful would become customary. To assist 
this natural inclination of the human heart, Augustine, 
in his younger days, had imbibed deeply of the Platonic 
philosophy, which taught the doctrine of purgatory. 
Unconsciously influenced by it, he gave form to that 
which became afterwards a dogma from which his soul 
would have recoiled with horror. Gregory, the Great, 
finished the edifice which Augustine had founded, with 
the scattered and disorganized materials of his super- 
stitious age. The Schoolmen put their finishing touches 
on it, and it was ready for use. And used it was with 
a vengeance. It became the mighty power by which 
Rome kept the world in awe. By it kings were forced 
into submission. By it misers were scared into gener- 
osity. By it the masses were made the pliant tools of 
an unscrupulous clergy.* Like der Graf in Goethe's 

^Lecky's " History of European Morals," vol. 11, p. 247. 



HELL AND DAMlSTATIdST, 49 

" Gross Kophta," the Roman Church by turns terrified 
and persuaded the ignorant and credulous into the most 
abject submission by means of a phantom that had, after 
all, no existence but in itself. 

The next appeal is to Scripture. Many writers, such 
as Bellarmine, Alexander, Cajet an, and Moehler rest the 
doctrine almost, if not entirely on tradition. Many are 
candid enough to acknowledge that there is no sure 
foundation for it in Scripture. Rev. P. Collot, doctor of 
the Sorbonne, has prepared a "Doctrinal and Scriptural 
Catechism," in which he ignores the Biblical argument 
altogether. But in popular hand-books, appeals are not 
unfrequently made to Holy Writ. Rev. Stephen Kee- 
nan's "Doctrinal Catechism," published under the 
approval of Archbishop Hughes, contains several refer- 
ences to Scripture. He begins with Genesis xxxvii, 35, 
where Jacob says : " I will go down into Sheol unto my 
son mourning." But this certainly cannot mean purga- 
tory. Jacob simply meant that he would go to his son 
Joseph in the abode of the dead. The patriarch had no 
thought of the happiness or misery of that abode. Far 
less did he think of it as a place of expiatory suffering, 
or of captivity until Christ should come to release him. 

Appeal is next made to a passage in Maccabees, where 
Judas is said to have sent twelve thousand drachms of 
silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins 
of the dead. 2 Mace, xii, 43-46. But this book is no 
authority, as it is not canonical. The Jews never re- 
ceived it as a part of their Scripture. The New Testa- 
ment contains no citations from it. Many Catholics 
regarded it with suspicion until the Council of Trent 
pronounced it canonical. Augustine says it had been 
received by the Church, as not altogether unprofitable, 



50 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

if it be read and heard with sobriety. But he denies its 
canonicity on his own responsibility.^ Cyprian denies 
that it is of Divine authority. Jerome, the most learned 
of the Fathers, says repeatedly that the Apocryphal 
books are of no force in the proof or disproof of doc- 
trines. 

And even if this book were admitted as a witness, the 
passage u«der consideration would not prove the exist- 
ence of a purgatory. For the sacrifice for which Judas 
paid was offered for all — those that had died possibly 
in " mortal sin" as well as tor those " who had fallen 
asleep in godliness." Besides, this sacrifice was not 
made with a reference to expiation, but in view of " the 
resurrection" There is not a particle of evidence that 
the prayer referred to was not, like those in the fourth 
century, ofiered for the lost in hell and for the redeemed 
in heaven. As Dr. Pusey has shown, it does not follow 
that bacause some of the ancients prayed for the dead, 
they believed in a purgatory. f 

Romanists claim. Mat. v, 26 — " Thou shalt by no 
means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost 
farthing." The point of this verse is that we should 
seek to meet God on the ground of mercy rather than of 
strict justice. It neither says nor implies, that being in 
prison, is paying the debt. For an explanation of the 
word till^ in this verse, we would refer our Catholic 
readers to their own interpretation of the same word in 
Mat. i, 25 — " And he knew her not till she brought forth 
her first-born Son." It is argued that till does not here 
imply that Mary knew Joseph at all. On the same 



* De Civ. Dei Lib. xiv, 23. 

f " An Earnest Remonstrance, " &c., p. 125. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 61 

ground it might be said that the word till does not imply- 
that the uttermost farthing will ever be paid. We make 
this remark simply to show that the Catholic interpreta- 
of Mat. V, 26, is not self-consistent. 

Our Saviour says, that the sin against the Holy Ghost 
shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the 
world to come. Mat. xii, 32. Romanists claim that 
this declaration implies that some sins may be forgiven 
in the world to come. As Bellarmine has admitted, this 
inference is illogical. The Saviour simply means that 
the sin against the Holy Ghost is absolutely unpardonable. 
Purgatory is not a place of forgiveness and pardon, but 
of expiation and purification. It is a prison where the 
last farthing must be paid. Hence, by the showing of 
Romanists themselves, it does not follow that since some 
sin will 7iot be forgiven in the world to come, others will 
be forgiven. It might be so argued if purgatory were 
a place of pardon instead of satisfaction. In addition 
to this, it is more than probable that " the world to come" 
refers to duration after the general judgment. At least, 
that is included. Therefore, since purgator}^ is confined 
to the intermediate state, this passage excludes the 
Romish inference altogether. 

''No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that 
came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is 
in heaven." John iii, 13. Some writers quote this verse 
to prove that no one had gone to heaven before the as- 
cension of Christ ; and that, therefore, the saints of the 
old dispensation must have been retained in the middle 
place, called Limbus Pairum^ or purgatory, waiting for 
their Deliverer. By reading the 12th and 13th verses 
together, we may see at once that Jesus only meant 
that no one was qualified to speak on earth of heavenly 



52 HELL AND DAMNATION, 

things who had not himself been in heaven. It is a 
matter of fact that many had ascended to heaven under 
the old economy. Enoch was translated that he should 
not see death. Heb. xi, 5. Is it credible that he was 
only removed to purgatory^ or something very much 
like it ? Elijah " went up by whirlwind to heavenP 
2 Kings iij 11. Who can believe that thiB only means 
that Elijah became an imprisoned spirit ? He did not 
look like it on the mount of the transfiguration. 

" The fire shall try every man's work of what sort it 
is. If any man^s work abide which he hath built there- 
upon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work 
shall be burned^ he shall suffer loss : but he himself shall 
be saved; yet so as by fire.'^ 1 Cor. iii, 11-15. Some 
Catholics find in these verses a support for the doctrine 
of purgatory. But this claim is certainly unfounded. 
This fire differs in many respects from that of purgatory. 
The fire that Paul refers to is a U^t of v:orks^ while pur- 
gatory is a purification of persons. And then the Apostle 
says that every man's work shall be made manifest by 
this fiery test. Even Romanists will not contend that 
every hody — prophets^ apostles, martyrs, and saints — go 
to purgatory ! This passage is then irrelevant. By 
proving too much for the Catholic, it proves nothing. 
Its probable meaning is, that every body will be thor- 
oughly tested by the trials of Providence, death, and 
especially of the judgment day. This is the view enter- 
tained by Basil, Origen, Ambrose, Lactantius, Augustine, 
and most modern commentators. 

"Else what shall they do, w^hich are baptized for the 
dead, if the dead rise not at all ? Why are they then 
baptized for the dead ?" 1 Cor. xv, 29. This is confes- 
sedly a difficult passage. But it is plain that it does 



HELL AND BAMKATIOK. 53 

not refer to the intermediate state, but to the reiurrectton. 
It says nothing of praying for the dead ; nor does it 
refer to a sacrifice in their behalf There is no intima- 
tion that the dead were really benefited by their baptism 
by proxy. Few Catholic writers speak of this verse 
with any degree of confidence. The most probable sup- 
position is, that Paul is referring to a custom that may 
have obtained in Corinth of baptizing a living person for 
a catechumen that had died before receiving baptism, in 
order that his name might be entered on the church roll. 

" That at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow, of 
things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under 
the earth." PhiL ii, 10, 11. It is contended that by the 
''things under the earth" must be meant pnrgatorians. 
There is no ground, whatever, for the assertion that there 
is any such a reference here. Paul only means that the 
time is coming when everything, everywhere, will recog- 
nize the sovereignty of Jesus Christ. " Devils believe 
and tremble." The Gadarene demons recognized the 
divinity of Christ and obeyed his word. Such was his 
authority, that unclean spirits, and those whom they 
possessed, trembled in his presence, and did his bidding. 
There will be a time when this recognition and obedi- 
ence — prompted either by fear or by love — will be 
universal. 

Soine claim from 2 Tim. i, 18 and iv, 19, that Paul 
prayed for Onesiphorus after he had died. But there is 
no evidence whatever that he was dead. Onesiphorus 
traveled — perhaps on business. 2 Tim. i, 17. The 
probability is, that he was aw^ay from home when Paul 
wrote this letter ; and he wished to be remembered to 
his hospitable family. The contrary must be proved be- 
fore it can be show^n that Paul prayed for the dead. 



54 HELL AND DAMKATIOK. 

Of course every Romanist is familiar with the passage 
that speaks of Christ preaching to spirits in prison. 
1 Pet. iii, 18. Whatever this passage may mean, it 
cannot possibly refer to purgatory, because (1) The 
preaching was to the antediluvians — persons guilty of 
moral sins. 1 Pet. iii, 20; Gen. vi, 5, 11-13. (2) On 
the supposition that purgatory is referred to, it is inex- 
plicable why the antediluvians are mentioned to the 
exclusion of all others. (3) There is no indication that 
the imprisoned spirits were henefited by the preaching. 
The most probable idea is that Christ, by the Divine 
Spirit, went, and by the agency of Noah, preached to 
the antediluvians, whose spirits were in prison at the 
time of Peter's writing. To use Barnes' illustration, it 
is as if we were to say that Whitfield came to America 
and preached to the souls in perdition. This is the 
interpretation adopted, not only by most Protestant 
expositors, but by many whom the Catholic Church 
claims, such as Augustine, Aquinas and Calmet. The 
idea that by the " prison " purgatory is meant, is quite 
modern. It received its strength from the Council of 
Trent. It cannot be found in the writings of the 
Fathers. 

" And there shall in nowise enter in anything that 
defileth ;" or, according to the Douay Bible, " anything 
defiled." — Rev. xxi, 27. Protestants do not dispute 
this. But they deny that there is any evidence here of 
a purgatory. The defiled are here contrasted with 
those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of 
life. But even Romanists hold that the names of those 
who die in the church are in that book. How, then, 
can it be said with any consistency that they are unfit 
to be in heaven ? He whose name is worthy of a place 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 65 

in Christ's book, is certainly worthy of a place at his 
right hand. 

After thus refuting the Romish arguments, we will 
proceed to enumerate a few considerations in refutation 
of the doctrine of purgatory. 

1. The Romish doctrine makes. a departed soul depen- 
dent on the Avill of a man. The priest has the power to 
release it or retain it in its prison. Now^ it is highly 
improbable that God would leave a soul, and especially 
that of a believer, thus dependent on the infirmities of a 
human being. A departing soul is said to go to God 
who gave it. Eccl. xii, 7. It is incredible that its 
condition should still be under the control of a mortal 
being. The Protestant holds that the w^ords of the 
dying Christ may be repeated by every dying Christian : 
" Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." 

Circumstances happen oftentimes when the services of 
a priest are not available. Can it be that a soul may 
suffer untold agonies on account of accidents in this 
world ? Byron wn^ote many a sillier verse than that 
one with which he closes one of his masterly descrip- 
tions of a shipwreck : 

All the rest perish'd ; near two hundred souls 

Had left their bodies ; and, what's worse, alas ! 
When over Catholics the ocean rolls, 

They must wait several weeks before a mass 
Takes off one peck of purgatorial coals ; 

Because, till people know what's come to pass, 
They won't lay out their money on the dead — 

It costs three francs for every mass that's said. 

2. Neither the word purgatory, nor any synonym of 
it is to found in the Bible. We have shown at the out- 
set that neither Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, nor Tartarus, 
bear this signification. It would not be so very strange 
if some abstract principle had been left without a 



56 HELL AND DAMNATION 

name. But that a place so real and so important as 
Romanists believe purgatory to be, should be unnamed 
in God's Word, is simply incredible. How often heaven 
and hell are mentioned ! How many synonyms they 
have ! How variously are they described ! But there 
is purgatory — a place as real as heaven or hell, accord- 
ing to the Romish Church — left without a mention, with- 
out a name, without a description ! There can be no 
explanation of this omission, but that no such a place 
exists.' 

3. The doctrine of purgatory implies that there are 
sins that are not deserving of God's everlasting displea- 
sure. " Venial sins " are trifling sins. But it is un- 
scriptural to say that any sin is a trifle in the sight of 
God. Every sin is mortal. " The wages of sin is death." 
— Rom. vi, 28. 

4. The doctrine of purgatory is an insult to the blood 
of Jesus Christ, which cleanseth from all sin. It pre- 
tends to- supplement his work. It implies that His 
satisfaction was not complete. The declaration that He 
is the propitiation for our sins (John ii, 2), extinguishes 
everj^ spark of purgatory forever. 

5. Moehler charges the Protestant doctrine with pre- 
supposing some sudden, magical change in death.* 
This sounds rather strange if not inconsistent from one 
who believes in the " sudden, magical change" of tran- 
substantiation, baptismal regeneration, and extreme 
unction. But let that pass. It is not a fact that God 
always prepares his creatures for their new state of 
existence in their transition to that new state of existence ? 
Immediately at birth the lungs begin to appropriate the 



* " Symbolism/' book i, part ij sec. 33. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 67 

atmosphere into which the new-born creature is intro- 
duced. This principle pervades nature in all its depart- 
ments. May this method of the Divine procedure not 
extend so far as the introduction of the believer into his 
heavenly state of existence ? There is no conceivable 
reason why the Holy Spirit should not sanctify a soul 
in a second as well as in sixty years. Many of Christ's 
miracles may fairly be regarded as nothing more than 
accelerations of natural processes.* May there not be 
accelerations in the process of sanctification ? If the 
Spirit can regenerate instantaneously — as Romanists 
admit that it does — why may he not wholly sanctify 
instantaneously? In the light of God's methods in 
nature; in the light of Christ's instantaneous cures and 
cleansings (Luke xvii, 14) ; in the light oi the power of 
the Holy Ghost, who can doubt that the believer is 
fully prepared for paradise in the transition of death ? 
To deny the possibility of this is certainly '^ limiting the 
Holy One of Israel.'' 

6. The doctrine of purgatory implies that the work of 
sanctification is carried on and completed after death. 
This is without warrant in Scripture. The Holy Spirit 
sanctifies the sinner by the use of means that do not 
exist in purgatory, such as the Scriptures, the Gospel, 
and the sacraments. Nor will purgatory admit of the 
good works that are mentioned as the fruits of sanctifi- 
cation. Since sanctification is a work carried on by the 
use of means to produce certain results, it is probable 
that it will cease where those means and those fruits are 
impossible. This probability becomes a certainty when 



' Oishausen's Commentary," on Mat. xiv, 15-21. 



58 HELL AIS^D DAMlNTATlOlSr. 

we remember that tlie Scriptures throughout represent 
sanctiiication as a work limited to this life.* 

7. The doctrine of purgatory represents sanctification 
as a partial work, affecting only the departed soul. But 
the Scriptures teach that this work pertains to the body 
as well as the soul. "^ Your body is the temple of the 
Holy Ghost." — 1 Cor. vi, 9. "He is the Saviour of the 
body.'' — Eph. V, 23. "And the very God of peace sanc- 
tify you wholly ; and I pray God your whole spirit and 
soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of 
our Lord Jesus Christ." — 1 Thes. v, 28. The body is 
generally a partner in and an instrument of sin. At 
death it needs purification and expiation just as much as 
the soul. But the Romish dogma represents the body 
as entirely neglected, and the soul alone as receiving 
preparation for heaven. This is as unreasonable as it is 
nnscripturai 

8. The Scriptures contain many expressions and state- 
ment which contradict the doctrine of purgatory. Paul 
says that we must all appear before the judgment seat 
of Christ; that every one may receive the things done 
in the body^ according to that he hath done, whether it 
be good or bad. 2 Cor. v, 10» This must refer to the 
day of Judgment, since Christ is represented as having 
ascended his judical throne,, which will not occur until 
then. But we are told that the risen dead will be 
judged according to their deeds and characters whih in 
the hody^ and not according to their posthumous ex- 
piations. 

John heard a voice saying, " Blessed are the dead 



*Comp, Col. i, 12 ; 1 Thes. v, 23; Rev. xx, 14. 



HELL AND DAMNATION, 59 

which die in the Lord from henceforth : Yea, saith the 
Spirit, that they may rest from their labors ; and their 
works do follow them."— Rev. xiv, 13. The uncertainty 
about the relation of the word henceforth^ does not affect 
the main idea of this verse. It means that all who die 
in the Lord are Messed and go to resL Now, by the 
teaching of Romanism itself, those who die in the 
Church, die in the Lord. But all who die in the Lord 
go to enjoy a " rest " and blessedness, not purgatorial 
flames. 

In 2 Cor. xii, 2-4, Paul says that he had been caught 
up to the third heaven, where he had heard unspeaka- 
able words. In regard to this account, a few points 
should be noted. 1. It is not material whether this be 
taken as a mere vision, or as a temporary translation. 
Its representation of Paul's admissibility to paradise or 
the third heaven would be the same in either case. 2. 
This vision or translation had occurred fourteen years 
previous to the writing of this letter. 3. Paul was not 
wholly sanctified at the time of this vision or translation. 
In Rom. vii, he confesses this fully.* 4. If Paul, not- 
withstanding his imperfections, could be caught up to 
the third heaven, it follows that all believers may pass 
immediately to glory whenever they leave the body, or 
even with the body, if God saw fit to take them hence 
in that way. 

The Saviour said to the thief on the cross, " To-day 
shalt thou be with me in paradise." — Luke xxiii, 43. 
Some Catholic writers have said that by paradise here 
is meant that part of purgatory called Limbus Patrum^ 



* See Hodge's " Commentary/^ on Rom. vii, 7-25, and " Syste» 
matic Theology," vol. iii, p. 222, 



60 HELL A:N^I) BAMKATlOl^. 

where the saints of the old dispensation were "confined* 
This is a mere assumption. Paradise never meant a 
place of suffering or confinementj in sacred or profane 
literature. Ever since the time of Theophylact, some 
have insisted on connecting to-day with- / say^ instead of 
the following clause. No one would think of such a 
shiftj except a controversialist driven to desperation. 
There is not a single manuscript, edition, or version of 
the New Testament that gives the verse in that way. 
Nor is there any foundation for the claim that this was 
a " special privilege " conferred on the thief, for his faith 
and confession. 

As Christ's resurrection was a pattern of the resurrec- 
of all believers, so, no doubt, the salvation of the peni^ 
tent thief was a pattern of the glorification of all 
believers when they die. This passage has given 
Romanists a great deal of trouble. Their explanation of 
it has been various, inconsistent, and sometimes ill- 
natured. It is hard to kick against the goads of truth 
and facts. The thief on the cross, saved in an instant, 
and glorified in the paradise of God the same day, is an 
eternal witness against the doctrine of an intermediate 
purgatory. 

The scriptural arguments cannot be evaded nor invali- 
dated. What is divine, is never moved by anything 
that is merely human, even though it be backed by the 
accumulated authority and traditions of a thousand 
generations. Nor has Bossuet helped his cause one 
particle by insinuating that some of the earlier 
Protestants believed in a purgatory.*^ He might as well 



"^Varieties, book vii,29 ; xi, 157, 165. 



HELL AKB DAMNATION. 61 

have claimed an *' evidence of Catholicity" in the fact 
that, not very many years ago it was believed by thou- 
sands of devout Romanists that '^ St. Patrick's purga- 
tory," in the south of Ireland, was really connected with 
— if it was not a part of — the abode of the awful dead. 

Literature. — Hodge's Systematic Theology, vol, iii, pp. 744- 
770. Calvin's Institutes^ book iii, ck. v. Barnes' Notes, on 1 Pet. 
iii, 18-20. Edgar's Variations of Popery ^ ck. xvii. 



CHAPTER V. 

The Judgment to Come. 

Thus far we have taken as granted that there will be a 
general judgment at the end of the world. But, as 
Universalists and Rationalists generally deny this, the 
position must be established by further proofs. 

Every theist admits that " the Lord reigneth." Every 
true philosopher perceives that " He is clothed with 
majesty" as he reigns. Every believing heart "rejoices" 
that he reigns. But if Grod be a ruler, he must have his 
government; and government implies laws, justice, re- 
wards and penalties. On looking over the sacred volume, 
we find that the word judgment bears these several sig- 
nifications. Sometimes it means government. Samson 
judged \%r2ie\ twenty years. Jud. xvi, 31. Sometimes it 
designates the law of God. "Wherefore it shall come to 
pass, if ye hearken to these judgments^ and keep, and do 
them, that the Lord thy Grod shall keep unto thee the 
covenant and mercy which he sware unto thy fathers." 
Dent, vii, 12. Occasionally it signifies justice. There is 
no judgment in their goings. Is. lix, 8. Frequently it 
means inflicted punishment. "My sword shall be bathed 
in heaven : behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, 
and upon the people of my curse, lo judgment P — Is. xxxiv, 
5. The word judgment in either one of these meanings 
is of frequent occurrence in the Scriptures, especially in 
the Old Testament. 

The government of God includes the entire world. 



HELL A]N'D DAMXATIOK. 63 

He is a ju<3ge of the whole earth. He doeth according 
to his will in the army of heaven, and*among the inhab- 
itants of earth. On this, Universalism and Orthodoxy 
are agreed. 

And they concur farther that at present, God executes 
judgment in the earth through Christ. He "hath com- 
mitted all judgment unto the Son." John v, 22. After 
Christ had risen he proclaimed his universal dominion : 
"All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth/' 
Mat. xxviii, 18, 

But vjhe7i does Christ exercise this authority ? He 
has exercised it ever since the ascension ; "and he must 
continue to reign till he hath put all enemies under his 
feet." — 1 Cor. xv, 25. Under his reign we have laws^ 
righteousness, pardons, rewards and punishments. In 
the sense of exercising these functions, Christ is judging 
the world at present. But Universalists assert that this 
is the only judgment that mankind will ever be subject 
to. According to them, the Gospel dispensation, is at 
the same time, the day of judgment. The judge is sit- 
ting on his judgment-seat 7ioia^ and all the nations are 
gathered before him to be judged. This is the result of 
Universalist dogmatism on this subject. 

But in addition to the continuous judgment of Christ, 
until the end of the world, the Scriptures teach that 
there will be a univei^al judgment at the end of the 
world. The meaning of this doctrine is so well under- 
stood, that it needs no further defining; and we will at 
once proceed to enumerate some of its f)roofs. 

1. There is nothing absurd or improbable in the doc- 
trine that there will be a general judgment at the close 
of the present order of things. The world is scarcely 
ready to concede that the author of " Common Sense in 



64 HELL ANB BAMKATIOK. 

Religion,^^ possesses more " common sense" than the 
author of " The A*nalogy of Religion to the Constitution 
and Course of Nature." The latter says, " I find no 
appearance of a presumption, from the analogy of nature, 
against the general scheme of Chistianity that God cre- 
ated and invisibly governs the world by Jesus Christ, 
und hy htm also will hereafter judge it in righteousness^ i. e. 
render to every one according to his works.^ Bretschneider 
boasted that his only standard ^' in religion" was " com- 
mon sense," or reason. And yet he admitted that there 
is nothing in the doctrine of a general judgment contra- 
ry to reason. f 

Milller has contented that a final judgment is a moral 
necessity, J And the carping objections of Strauss § to 
this doctrine, disappear, like vapor, before the crying de- 
mands of the soul for order, peace, and joy in the Divine 
government. 

The doctrine of a final judgment is in accordance with 
the methods of the best regulated governments. 

In every civil court, several successive days are occupied 
in trying alleged violators of law ; and on a fixed day — 
ordinarily on Saturday— those found guilty — are called 
up to be sentenced. This is familiarly known as " judg- 
ment-day in court." Is it unreasonable to suppose that 
the Judge of All is reserving the end of the world — the 
Saturday that will close the week of time — to announce 
the acquittal of the righteous and the sentence of the 
wicked ? 



^ Butler's " Analogy," part ii, ch. 2. 

f " Dogmatik der Evangelisch-lutherischen Kirclie," band ii, 
p. 445. 

I" Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol'i, p. 238. 
I " Glaubenslehre," band ii, sec. 105. 



HELL AKD BAMKATIOK. 66 

2. The Scrii^tures have been understood by the church 
universal in every age as teaching this doctrine. Un- 
fortunately Christians have differed on a thousand things. 

But on thiSj the great bulk of the christion church has 
held but one opinion. The creeds of the Greek, the 
Romanist, the Protestant, and the Mohammedan, are 
alike in having this as an article of faith. The Apostolic 
and ecclesiastical fathers, the schoolmen, the reformers, 
and theologians, representing every Christian denomina- 
tion up to the present time, have united in holding this 
doctrine. It is true that men have differed in their views 
of its details, such as its time, place and manner. But 
as to the main fact of a general judgment at the end of 
the world, there has been no disagreement. Now, how 
are we to account for this unanimity? Why have all 
agreed in claiming the scripturalness of this doctrine, 
while they varied on so many others ? The only adequate 
answer is, that this doctrine so pervades the word of God, 
that nothing but the blindness ot prejudice, or the cross- 
eye of a naturally deformed judgment, can fail to see its 
awful presence there. 

3. Jesus will judge the dead of the old dispensation. 
" Before him shall be gathered all nations!''^ Mat. xxv, 32. 
He shall judge the quick and the dead. Acts x, 42 ; 2 
Tim. iv, 1 ; 1 Pet. iv, 5. All the dead — the small and the 
great — every soul in the custody of death and Hades — 
will stand before him to be judged out ^of the things 
which were written in the Books, according to their 
works. Rev. xx, 11-13. But if Christ is to be the judge 
of all^ it follows that there will be a general judgment ; 
since, by the showing of Universalists themselves,* pre- 



**' Theology of Universalism/' pp. 250, 251. 



60 HELL ANB BAMKATIOI^. 

viously to the birth of Christ, God the Father was the 
judge of all the earth. Christ has not already judged 
the dead of the old dispensation. But he will judge 
them, as he is ordained to be the Judge of alL This im- 
plies a general judgment in the future. 

4. According to the repeated representations of Scrip- 
ture, there will be a general resurrection at the end of 
the world. The Pharisees — who constituted the great 
majority of the Jewish nation at the time of Christ — 
believed this doctrine. Josephus gives this testimony, 
and Alger makes this admission.* He acknowledges 
still further— rather grudgingly, it is true — that it " is 
in their canonic scriptures by way of vague and hasty 
allusion." Christ refers to this doctrine with approval. 
When Martha said that she knew that her brother would 
rise again in the resurrection at the last day, Jesus replied 
that he was the resurrection and the life ; and he illus- 
trated his meaning by calling forth the body as well as 
the soul of his deceased friend. This was much more 
than one of J. Freeman Clarke's " common sense" resur- 
rections.f That Paul believed in the resurrection of the 
body is evident in every reference that he makes to the 
subject. In his defense before Agrippa, he refers to the 
incredibility of the resurrection. Now, this incredibility 
could attach only to the resurrection of the hody. A 
" common sense" resurrection would not seem so absurd 
to Agrippa and his companions. The fifteenth chapter 
of first Corinthians is an elaborate argument for the doc- 
trine of a bodily resurrection.. Comp. Acts iv, 2 ; xvii, 



*" Doctrine of a Future Life/' p. 491. 
f " Common Sense in Religion," p. 193. 



HELL AIN^D DAMIN^ATIOI^. 67 

18; xxiii, 6; Phil. ii]\ 2 ; Heb. vi, 2. The testimony of 
Scripture on tliis subject is abundant and unambiguous. 
There shall be a resurrection of tlie dead, both of the just 
and of the unjust. Acts xxiv, 15. "For the hour is com- 
ing, in which all that are in the graves shall hear his 
voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done good 
unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done 
evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John v, 28-29. 
As we are not refuting Swedenborgians but Universa- 
lists, who, if they are represented by Mr. Thayer, believe 
in some kind of a genei'al resurrection,* we will not 
multiply proof texts. The errorists who, like Hymeneus 
and Philetus, say that the resurrection is past already, 
are scarcely to be found. And those who contend that 
it is now going on in its full sense, are comparatively 
rare. The meaning of the Scripture is so clear that even 
annihilationists, such as Hastings and Hudson, admit 
that the New Testament teaches the doctaine of a gene- 
ral resurrection at the end of the world. 

This resurrection is represented as occurring at a par- 
ticular time in the future. It will take place at the blast 
of the archangel's trumpet. 1 Cor. xv, 52 ; 1 Thes. iv, 
16. It will take place w^hen Christ will come with his 
angels in great glory in the clouds of heaven. Mat. xxiv, 
29-31. It is said th.at the changing of the living and 
the raising of the dead will take place instantaneously — 
in the twinkling of an eye. 1 Cor. xv, 52. 

But the Scriptures teach that there will be a judgment 
of the world after the resurrection. Our Saviour says that 
the ricrhteous and the wicked will come forth at his bid- 



Theology of Universalism/' pp. ^07, 226. 



68 HELL AI^D DAMlSTATIOI^r. 

ding ; the one to receive life, and the other to receive con- 
demnation. This adjudication will folloio the resurreCo 
tion. Now, since there will be a resurrection; and since 
that will be a simultaneous quickening of all the dead; and 
since all are to be judged after their resurrection, it fol- 
lows that there will be a general judgment. 

5. There are expressions in the Scriptures that cannot 
be fairly referred to any doctrine but that of the general 
judgment. Those who believe this doctrine, have never 
denied that God is judging continually in the sense of 
ruling. But they deny that this fact is any disproof of 
a future and final judgment. They do not pretend to^ 
say how that judgment will be conducted, or how long 
it will be continued. 

Although God is a judge in the earth, the Bible 
teaches in many ways that there is to be a general sen- 
tence-day for the wicked, and a general acquittal-day for 
the righteous. In connection with the Scriptural cita- 
tions to prove this doctrine, let it be kept in mind that 
this was a popular belief among the Jews in the days of 
Christ. 

Even the Old Testament contains pretty clear intima- 
tions of a future judgment; especially if we interpret 
them, as we should, in the light of the New Testament. 
Solomon warns the young man of pleasure and sin to 
know that for all those things God will bring him to 
judgment. Ec. xi, 9. And he concludes the book of 
Ecclesiastes by saying that God will bring every work 
to judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, 
or whether it be evil. Daniel says that the many of them 
that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake ; some to 
everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting con- 
tempt. Ch. xii, 2. f 



HELL AKB DAMKATIOK. 69 

The declarations of Chri^^t on tliis subject, are numer- 
ous, and absolutely decisive. The quibblings of Ilniver- 
salists over his solemn words are shocking. He says : 
" Whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, 
when ye depart out of that house, or city, shake off the 
dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, it shall be 
more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, in 
the day of judgment than for that city." Mat. x, 14, 15. 
Comp. Mat. xi, 20-24. " I say unto you, that every idle 
word that men shall speak, they shall give account there- 
of in the day of judgment,'''' Mat. xii, 36. If Mat. xxv, 
31-46 is not a description of a final judgment, we may 
safely say that we do not know what Christ said on any 
subject whatever. If the parable of the tares in Mat. 
xiii, does not teach that there will be a general judgment, 
with a final separation of the righteous from the wicked, 
we may well despair of ever understanding the parables 
of Christ, even with his own explanations of them. 

Paulfsaid on Mars' Hill, that God had appointed a day 
in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by 
that man whom he hath ordained. Acts xvii, 31. The 
definite appointment of a day with the definite appoint- 
ment of a judge implies a general judgment. And if 
this were a present judgment, the resurrection of Christ 
could be no assurance of it. This judgment is as yet 
unseen. The resurrection of Christ is the guaranty that 
it will take place. 

Paul discoursed before Felix of righteousness, temper- 
ance, and the judgment to come {t6v KplfiaroQ rov fik'klovTo^) 
This could hardly have been understood by Felix with 
only a present-life reference, as Paul was speaking of the 
judgment, and that a judgment to come. We may judge 
further of the Apostle's doctrine from the effect of his 



70 HELL AKD DAMNATION. 

discourse on the procurator. " Felix trembled." The 
Universalists, view of the judgment would scarcely have 
disturbed the mind of that hardened libertine. 

In Rom. ii, xvi, the same Apostle refers to the day when 
God shall judge the secrets of men, according to this 
Gospel, i. e., according as he had taught. He says also 
in the same epistle " that every one of us shall give ac- 
count of himself to God." Rom. xiv, 12. In 2 Cor. iv, 
10, he says that we must all appear before the judgment 
seat of Christ ; that every one may receive the things 
done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether 
it be good or bad. Some Universalists contend that 
this refers to the destruction of Jerusalem."^ But that 
cannot be, as neither Paul nor the Corinthians were at 
Jerusalem when it was besieged and destroyed. The 
Greek word f3yfia — translated judgment-seat — implies a 
different method of judging from that now employed by 
the appointed judge. The jSy/ia was a bench or throne 
from which a speaker addressed an assembly. It was 
applied to the rostrum or stage in the Pnyx where the 
Athenian citizens convened. Pericles delivered his cel- 
ebrated funeral oration from a py^ua, Thuc. ii, 34. This 
w^ord invariably pre-supposes a multitude gathered before 
him that sits upon it to deliver an address or pronounce 
a sentence. Ccmp. Mat. xxvii, 19; Acts xii, 21 ; Rom. 
xiv, 10; Acts XXV, 10, 17; xviii, 12, 16,17; John xix, 
13. This word, in connection with the word hjinpoadev — 
which generally means in the presence of — shows most 
clearly that Paul had in his mind a judgment pronounced 
on a multitude assembled before the judge. 



^Balfour's " Es^ajs/' p. 800. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 71 

In the Epistle to the Hebrews, it is said that it is ap- 
pointed unto men once to die, but after this the judg- 
ment. Ch. ix, 27. Like the unclean spirit wandering 
through dry places, seeking rest and finding none, Uni- 
versalists have been roaming about in search of a suitable 
interpretation — we should say dodge — of this passage. 
They will not return to the one with which they started.* 
It is too miserable a habitation. Their present exposition 
of it is, that as the Jewish high priests died, and after 
them the judgments in their breastplates, so Christ was 
once offered to bear the sins of many. Whittemore, 
Ballou, and Thayer took their refuge in tliis interpreta- 
tion. But this is mere nonsense. The Jewish high 
priests were never known as " the men" or " those men." 
Nor did one of them ever die in the sense designated. 
It was the essential import of their sacrifices that the 
animal victim died in order that its offerers might not 
die. Neither is it true that Christ died as a priest. He 
died. only as a sacrifice. But the point of the comparison 
is between the Old and New Testament priestliood.\ 

The simple meaning of the passage is, that as it is 
appointed unto men once to die a temporal death, so 
Christ, as high priest, offered himself once to save them. 
It is of momentous importance to them to be saved, as 
there is to be a judgment after death. 

Peter says, that the angels that sinned are reserved un- 
to judgment. 2 Pet. ii, 4. Universalists generally try 
to cut this knot by denying the personality of evil spir- 
its. But in the 9th verse it is said that the Lord reserves 
the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished. 



* Balfour's " Essays/' p. 271. 

t See Lindsey's " Commentary," in loc. 



73 HELL AND DAMNATION, 

The fallen angels sinned long — long ago. And still their 
final sentence is not pronounced. The unjust are kept 
in custody for a future disposition. This will not coin- 
cide with any view but that of a day of general judgment. 
Peter — trained as he was to believe this doctrine — could 
not but mean this by the day of judgment. Jude too, 
must have meant the same thing when he spoke the judg- 
ment of the great day. Jude v, 6. 

Rev. XX, 11-13 — is a graphic description of a general 
judgment. The judge, the books, the human race are 
there represented. All are to be judged according to 
their works. 

There is not a single word in the Scripture to indicate 
that the decisions of that day will ever be revoked. 
The sentence of that tribunal, everywhere wears the ap- 
pearance of a most awful finality. There can be no 
appeal from the verdict of the superme court of eternity. 
It is called an eternal judgment in view of the immuta- 
bility of its decisions. Heb. vi, 2. The lips of him 
whose name was Truth have said that the condemnation 
pronounced then will be eternal.' Mark, iii, 29. It ap- 
pears from 1 Cor. xv, 24-28, that after the judgment 
Christ will deliver up the kingdom to God. He will no 
more sit on his mediatorial throne as the Saviour of the 
lost. He will leave his judgment-seat. He will bear no 
appeals. He will make no repeals. On the brink of an 
endless eternity, he will utter those most solemn words 
in God's solemn book: ''He that is unjust, let him be 
unjust still : and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still : 
and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still : and 
he that is holy, let him be holy still !" In view of this 
appalling declaration, how appropriate is the prophet's 
admonition : Prepare to meet thy God. 



CHAPTER VL 

Endless Retribution inferred from the Nature of Man. 

The advocates of Universalism generally make use of 
what may be called the argument from sentimentality. 
Even Mr. Alger puts considerable stress on this argu- 
ment.* And his pen pictures are quite as horrid and 
misrepresenting as the pencil-pictures of mediaeval artists. 
This argument runs as follows : Whatever human nature 
shrinks from is untrue ; human nature shrinks from eter- 
nal punishment ; therefore, the doctrine of eternal pun- 
ishment is untrue. But this is not sound logic. By a 
similar process of reasoning many absurd and repulsive 
conclusions would be reached. What would be thought 
of the writer that would argue that Jesus Christ is not 
worthy to be loved, because human nature, as a general 
thing, refuses to love him ? 

And the argument might be reversed, thus : Whatever 
human nature is prone to accept must be true ; human 
nature is prone to sin ; therefore sin must be exceedingly 
sinless, and not "exceeding sinful," as is so often repre- 
sented ! Thus the argument from sentimentality is un- 
reliable and suicidal. 

Mr. Alger, like Martineau before him, asserts still fur- 
ther that, many who profess to believe the doctrine of 
eternal retribution theoretically^ do not believe it prac- 
tically ; and he seems to regard this as a refutation of 



* « Doctrine of a Future Life," pp. 538-549. 



74 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

that doctrine. But is this a sound principle of reasoning ? 
Many do not believe practically that virtue is better 
than vice, or that heaven is better than ruin. Does that 
prove that virtue has no value and that heaven is not a 
reality ? It does if Mr. Alger's reasoning be correct. 

We were not a little surprised to find a writer of Mr. 
Alger's standing, trying to use the misconceptions and 
misrepresentations of the masses, past and present, as a 
disproof of the doctrine of eternal punishment. It is 
true that many have entertained very crude and gross 
ideas about hell. It is also true that those ideas have 
been encouraged by painters, poets, and preachers. But, 
side by side with this, went an equally crude and gross 
conception of heaven. If Mr. Alger will apply his rea- 
soning to heaven, he will extinguish it as well as hell. 

There are certain principles underlying and pervading 
human nature which go to show that the departing of 
those who will be found impenitent at 'the judgment, 
will be final. History has been a continuous evolution 
and illustration of these principles. Let us consider some 
of these facts of human nature ; and from them let us 
try to show that "common sense" is not all^ to say the 
least, on the side of Universalism. 

1. Observation and experience teach us that sinful 
habits often acquire a complete mastery over men. How 
many there are whose appetite and passions are uncon- 
trollable ! How many are possessed by the unclean spirits 
of impure, impious, or skeptical thoughts! There are 
multitudes who, by persistent sinning, are become so en- 
slaved by sin that they cannot cease from it, 2 Pet. ii, 
14. And were they to be translated, like Elijah, and 
live forever as they do in this world, we could scarcely 
hope that they would ever reform. " Can the Ethiopian 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 75 

cliange his skin, or the leopard his spots ? then may ye 
also do good that are accustomed to do evil." Jer. xiii, 
23. But it may be replied that deatli will effect a radical 
change in human nature. This is as contrary to reason 
as it is to Scripture. Habit fastens its iron yoke on the 
soul as well as on the body. The dissolution of the latter 
cannot then be the emancipation of the former. It has 
been shown in previous chapters, that character is not 
revolutionized by the transition of death. It is only 
transferred. Old habits of the mind will retain their 
inexorable sway in the world to come.* This potent and 
persistent mastery of confirmed evil habits, furnishes a 
very strong probability that the unjust and the filthy 
will remain unjust and filthy forever.f 

2. God, by the laws of nature, frequently visits the 
violators of those laws with endless punishments ; that 
is, a natural transgression is often punished with a loss 
that nature will never restore. If a man becomes intox- 
icated, and by some mishap, loses his limbs, there is no 
provision in nature to repair his loss. If education is 
neglected in youth, the neglecter must suffer the penalty 
of ignorance forever. If a man fails to improve a favor- 
able opportunity to become wealthy, he will have to 
endure the punishment of an irreparable poverty. Often- 
times a man suffers a life-long retribution for the sin of 
a single second ! 

Now, if God has attached endless punishments to the 
violation of natural laws, can there be any inconsistency 
in supposing that he will punish violators of moral laws 
in the same manner ? If God refuses to repair, through 



* Carpenter's " Mental Physiology," ch. viii. 
f Channing's Discourse on " The Evil of Sin.*' 



76 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

nature the losses, Avhich a debauchee may bring upon 
himself, who can deny that he may refuse to repair, 
through grace^ the losses which the rejecters of his Son 
may bring on themselves ? 

Again : it is plain that the punishments of nature are 
not all corrective or disciplinary. Many of them are un- 
deniably 'punitive. Nature is full ol capital punish- 
ments. Natural law is so adjusted that every offender, 
if he pass a certain point, shall be arrested and condemned 
to die on some of nature's relentless guillotines. A 
hangman's rope is suspended over every path of sin ; 
and no one has very far to go to find his neck in the fatal 
noose. Who can stand over Sodom and Gomorrah, or 
Pompeii and Herculaneum, and say that their punish- 
ment was reformatory and regenerative? If God punish- 
es penally^ and that as long as the body lasts, in this 
world, is there any improbability that he will punish 
penally^ and that as long as the soul will last, in the 
world to come ? If a man, by violating natural laws for 
a second, can bring on himself a life-long punishment, 
may he not, by a life-long violation of moral laws, bring 
on himself an endless punishment?* 

3. It is a principle in mechanics that a moving body 
will go on forever in a straight line, unless it is influ- 
enced by some force outside of itself. No one will deny 
that the same principle prevails in the moral and spiritu- 
al w^orld. It was not without reason that Locke taught 
that the inward furniture of the soul is supplied, in the 
main, by the influences of the outward world, reaching 
the mind through the organs of sensation. That which 



^ " Butler's Analogy," part 1, ch. ii.] 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 77 

a man is, he will contmne to be, if left entirely to himself. 
But if this be so, it goes to show that man will move on 
forever in the direction of his moral flight as he passes 
the portals of death. It is the orthodox view that the 
regenerating and sanctifying influences of the Holy 
Ghost will have been totally quenched by every lost 
soul in perdition. But let us admit, for argument's sake, 
that the gracious influences of God will continue in hell. 
Every body must admit that that influence, compared 
with the influence of the same spirit in this world, must 
be either greater^ equal or less. If that holy influence 
^\\W.^^Q greater^ then hell must be a better place than this 
world. The bottom-less pit will be a kind of second- 
class heaven. This no one believes. To say nothing 
more of this supposition, it i-s incredible, consistently 
with anything that God has revealed, that the influ- 
ences of the Divine Spirit will be as great in perdition 
as they are on earth. A consideration or two will con- 
vince anyone of this : (1.) It will be contrary to the 
wishes of the ungodly to go to that place of torment. 
If the everlasting fire will be as good a place as this 
world, with just as much of God's Spirit in it, how is it 
credible that those who will be sent there will plead so 
earnestly for the covering of the rocks and mountains, to 
save them from such a banishment? (2.) If there will 
be as much of God's Spirit in hell as there is in this 
world, the rich glutton's request that Abraham should 
send admonishers to his five brethren was unnecessary. 
(3.) If hell contains the Comforter, as well as the world, 
it is inconceivable why the children of God have always, 
and so earnestly warned everybody to avoid it. This 
was one of Christ's most frequent warnings. (4.) If the 
hearts of the wicked will contain as much of the Holy 



78 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

Spirit in hell as on earth, it cannot be that Christ will 
call them " cursed," and tell them to depart from 
him in the judgment-day. They will be as truly 
"blessed" as those on the right hand. They will 
differ only in the degree of their blessedness. Thus 
there is no foundation for the supposition that the influ- 
ences of the Holy Ghost will be as great in hell as they 
are on earth. Therefore, if that gracious influence will 
continue there at all, it will be in a lesser degree than it 
is bestowed in this world. 

Now, it is undeniable that very many spend their en- 
tire lives in sin, notwithstanding the deterring influences 
of the Holy Spirit. They resist (Acts vii, 51), grieve 
(Eph. iv, 30), and quench (1 Thes. v, 19) the Holy Spirit 
of God. If it be a fixed principle that every moving 
thing will go on in a straight line until arrested by a 
power outside of itself; and if the ungodly are able to 
move on in the same paths of sin through life, and even 
through death, is it not absolutely certain that they will 
continue to move on in the same direction in hell, where 
the Divine influences to deter and arrest them will be 
wealcer than they are in this world ? After a greater 
power has proved ineffectual, what likelihood is there 
that a fainter power will be successful, and that under 
circumstances immeasurably more unfavorable ? 

4. Not only men generally, but the godliest men that 
the world contains, punish those who wrong them, and 
continue impenitent, with an everlasting punishment. For 
instance, suppose a banker has a clerk, who is guilty of 
embezzling his money. At last the unfaithful servant is 
suspected, arrested, tried, and convicted. He is sent to 
the penitentiary. He remains there until the penalty of 
his crime is fully paid. On the day of his release, sup- 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 79 

pose he goes back to his old employer and asks for his 
old situation. Does he get it ? No. Why ? Has he 
not been punished for his crime ? Is he not now even 
with the law ? And is it humane and just for his old 
employer to continue to punish him with suspicion and 
rejection from his employment ? Even the sickliest sen- 
timentalist must admit that it is just as long as there is 
no evidence that his character is changed. The banker 
punishes his dishonest clerk with exclusion from his 
desks and from the society of his family. He is socially 
damned. And if the two were to live in this world for- 
ever, the attitude of the banker would remain the same ; 
and everybody would say that it was wise, w^ell and 
righteous. In the meantime the clerk, finding himself 
suspected by everybody, loses his remaining self-respect, 
and becomes still worthier of suspicion. Examples of 
this kind are too numerous for any one to deny that this 
is the usual tendency of human nature. He who com- 
menced Vith a trifling theft, ends a lost man — lost to so- 
ciety, lost to himself, lost to his God — and lost forever ! 

But if it be right for man to punish those who sin 
against him, and continue impenitent, with an endless 
punishment, is it not right for God to act on the same 
principle? If it be just for one man to punish another, 
not only for what he has done, hut for what he is^ how 
can it be unjust for God to inflict punishment for the 
same reason ? And if men become more reckless under 
human punishments here, why may they not do the same 
under Divine punishments hereafter ?^ 

5. We know that it is the next thing to impossible for 



^"EcceDeus/' pp. 219-225. 



80 HELL AND DAMI^ATIOlSr. 

a man to reform when bis associations are evil. There 
are associations in this world that are terribly degraded 
and degrading. But there is scarcely a place on the 
face of the earth where good men and good influences 
are not within reach^ to say the least. And a happy 
accident will sometimes throw the corrupt under the re- 
freshing influences of the pure in heart. There are 
great advantages within the reach of the greatest social 
exile in the world. Nevertheless, that man is in a well- 
nigh hopeless condition, whose nature is corrupt, whose 
habits are evil, and whose associates are as wicked as 
himself. It is natural and usual for such a one to be- 
come worse and worse indefinitely. 

Those who will depart from Christ in the day of judg- 
ment will be under great social disadvantages. In the 
great multitude that will start before the word " depart^'* 
there will not be as much as one good man ! That com- 
pany will be corrupt through and through. It will not 
contain one with the love of God in his heart. It will 
not contain one with the Spirit of Christ in his soul. It 
will not contain one to give a good example to his com- 
panions. Everybody will be a moral obstacle to some- 
body else. It is a plain law of morals, as well as of na- 
ture, that corruption begets corruption. Sin incites to 
sin. This is one of the most immutable and extensive 
laws in existence. There is nothing in evil associations 
to inspire tlie wicked to reform. Where there will be 
nothing but tares ; nothing but goats ; yiothing but re- 
jecters of mercy; nothing hvX haters of God; nothing 
but lovers of sin ; nothing but revellers in corruption ; 
nothing but despisers of holiness ; nothing hnt "cursed" 
exiles from a rejected Saviour, it will be contrary to the 
law of man's nature, to the laws of society, and to the 



I 



HELL AKD DAMNATION. 81 

laws of sin and death, for any one to reform and become 
a new creature. If " evil associations corrupt good mor- 
als" they wiir^ most assuredly make had morals still 
worse. 

The separation of the wicked from the righteous in the 
judgment-day, is a very strong indication of their iinal 
reprobation. We know that in this world, where God 
offers salvation to all, the believer and the unbeliever 
are made to dwell together. All are urged to shun the 
company of the wicked, and to seek the companionship 
of the good and holy. But when we find God sending 
his enemies away from the companionship of the godly, 
we cannot but suspect that his gracious dealings with 
them have ceased. Did he make such a separation in 
this world, we would come to that conclusion at once. 
But why limit our supposition to this world, as God and 
man will be the same in the next. When God withdraws 
his ordinary means of grace — his church and his chil- 
dren — will he not also withdraw his rejected grace! 
Madness alone can entertain a hope that he will not. 

6. There is nothing in suffering, as such, to purify and 
reform the sufferer. This is affirmed by every class of 
writers, from Barnes* to Bovee.f The history of the 
world proves this incontrovertibly. Misery has always 
made the wicked worse instead of better. Thucydides says 
that the Athenians were never so presumptuous as when 
the plague was devastating their city and the surround- 
ing country. The plague in Milan in 1630, in London in 
1665, in Bagdad in 1831, had the same demoralizing 
effect on the inhabitants of those cities. It was when 



* " Atonement;' pp. 196-302. 

t" Christ and the Gallows," p. 312 et al. 



82 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

Paris and France were in the throes of their revolution 
that the most atrocious crimes were perpetrated. The 
people of Jerusalem were never so impious as when the 
Romans were besieging their city, and the black cloud 
of destruction was hanging heavy and cracking over 
their heads. When there is civil war, an epidemic, or a 
great fire in a populous city, the effect on criminal classes 
is invariably to make them more audacious, cruel and 
desperate.^ Byron, true to nature, has shown the demor- 
alizing and maddening effect of fear and despair on ship- 
wrecked voyagers, f 

It cannot be denied, in the face of the explicit testi- 
monies of Scripture, that hell will be a place of suffering. 
This fact can not be winnowed out of God's word with 
the fanning-mill of such words as " figurative," " meta- 
phorical," i" poetical," "spiritual," " exaggerated," etc. 
etc., be it turned ever so furiously. Such expressions as 
" utter darkness," "unquenchable fire," "weeping and 
wailing and gnashing of teeth," cannot mean anything 
but a state of suffering^ and great suffering too. 

But why should we hesitate over this matter, since 
the abode of the impenitent dead is expressly called a 
place of torment ? 

Now, if pains, sufferings, and terrors, instead of 
making bad men better, make them much worse, in this 
world, is it not likely that man will exhibit the same 
proclivities, under similar circumstances, in the world to 
come ? From what we know of the effect of mental or 
physical suffering on ungodly men, it is highly probable 
that the rejecters of salvation, instead of repenting and 



*McCosli's ''Divine Government," pp. 245-248. 
f " Don Juan Canto," ii, {St. 33, 34, 79 et passim. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 83 

turning to God, will only grow worse and worse in their 
place of torment* 

V. The orthodox doctrine denies that one who loves 
God and believes in his Son, will be sent into the ever- 
lasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels. The 
reprobate will be a sinner when beginning to suffer his 
punishment. This consideration alone is enough to 
furnish a presumption that his perdition will be endless* 
If the unbeliever could, in a short life commit sin enough 
to go to perdition, he can, as his character will continue 
the same, commit sin enough when in perdition to deserve 
to remain there. Let us for the present say nothing of the 
infinite demerit of sin, and grant that there is a measurable 
proportion between sin and punishment* Even from 
this stand-point the orthodox position is invincible. 
Everything teaches us that the punishment of an offence 
— be it natural, c^il, or moi*al — is of a much longer 
duration than the time occupied in committing it. Let 
us suppose that the finally impenitent will be punished 
for five hundred years for the iniquities of fifty years* 
He is as much of a sinner as he begins to suffer that 
punishment as he was during his earthly life. Every 
transgression and disobedience must receive its just 
recompense of reward in the next world as well as in 
this ; for God will still be holy and a hater of sin. Now 
if a man can in fifty years commit sins that may merit 
punishment for five hundred years, is it not certain that 
he will during those five hundred years commit addi- 
tional sins sufficient to deserve a punishment for five 
thousand years ; and when that period is ended will his 
accumulated guilt not merit the retribution of five million 
years ? It cannot be otherwise, as the offender will be 
wicked during the time of his punishment. Nearly a 



84 HELL AKD DAMNATION 

century has elapsed since President Edwards made use 
of this argument.* It has been ridiculed and execrated 
many times since ; but has never been answered, Bush^ 
nell's theory of the eternally approximated annihilation 
of the wicked would not, even if true, weaken the force 
of this reasoning. Where all the powers of the soul are 
given to sinning, even if those powers ai*e continually 
diminished, the guilt of the soul must evidently accumu^ 
late. We find it pi'ecisely so in this world. It may 
then be so in the next. 

After all, it may be asked, What if the ainiier should 
repent f To this we reply that there is no likelihood 
whatever that he will. Even if it be conceded to Erb- 
kam that the lost will possess a germ of moral life,f it 
will be impossible for that germ to develop into repent- 
ance, faith and love under the unfavorable influences that 
will surround it. It should be remembered that true 
repentance is not a mere regret tortured to speak by 
wretchedness ; nor is it a stroke of policy to get rid of 
punishment. It is rather a principle that hates sin on 
account of its nature as well as its effects, and loves 
holiness on account of its inherent desirableness, as well 
as its super-added rewards. The associations, the suffer- 
ings, and the character of the lost preclude the probabil- 
ity that they will ever experience such a repentance. 

The foregoing considerations should have special force 
with such men as J. Freeman Clarke, who believes that 
the Divine procedure with the wicked will be about the 
same in the next world as in this. On this supposition 
it is very certain that those who will depart from the 



* '^ Works/^ Carter's Ed., voL i, p. 615-6. 

t " Studien und Kritiken/' 1838, No. ii, pp. 384-494. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 85 

Saviour in the judgment-day will go to an endless pun- 
ishment. In the world to come as well as in this, cor- 
ruption will beget corruption. There, as well as here, 
suffering will only incite the ungodly to commit greater 
sins. There, as well as here man will be punished for 
every sin which he commits. There, as well as here, 
he may do a wicked deed in a second whose evil effects 
will be irreparable* Of all that has been said it may be 
repeated : " It is so in this world ; why shall it not be so 
hereafter too?" 



Literature. — William Jackson's B<impPon Lectures for 1875, 
on " The Doctrine of Retribution." 



CHAPTER VII. 

Eternal Punishment proved from Scripture. 
The Scriptures contain many declarations that a terri- 
ble retribution is in store for the wicked. A careful 
examination of the divine oracles makes it very probable^ 
to say the least, that that retribution will be endless. 
The advocates of universal salvation have adopted many 
shifts, subterfuges, and dodges to wrench these declara- 
tions into some kind of a conformity to their scheme. 

1. Many have been candid enough to admit that the 
doctrine of eternal punishment is clearly taught in the 
New Testament, and presumptuous enough to reject it 
notwithstanding. Theodore Parker said in one of his 
sermons : " I believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal 
torment: I do not accept it on his authority.-' Many 
have rejected the Bible because it teaches this doctrine. 

2. Bordering on this, is the position assumed by Mr. 
Alger. He claims that Christ taught Universalism, and 
then admits that his words, as recorded by the Evange- 
lists, teach precisely the reverse of it. The Apostles, 
being full of " the dogmas, prejudices, and hopes of their 
age and land, to some extent, misapprehended his mean- 
ing,"* Jesus connived at these misapprehensions, and 
the Holy Spirit gave his guidance to record them ! 
This simply means that the New Testament represents 
only Jewish " prejudices," mixed with heathen super- 



*" Doctrine of a Future Life/' pp. 318, 338, 525. 



HELL ATs^D DxVMKATIOK. 87 

stitions. It cannot be said of it that it is a reliable 
authority on any Christian doctrine. To know what 
Christ really said w^e must go to Mr, Alger instead of 
the Evangelists and Apostles ! 

All this is simply absurd. Jesus was a good teacher 
come from God. He came to separate truth from error. 
He certainly did not come to sanction superstition. 
Had he used more of what might be called " language 
of accommodation to the current notions of the time,'' 
would he have been persecuted as he was ? Is it not 
plain that under his teachings the views of the Apostles 
were radically changed in many respects ? Besides, if 
Christ has not been reported correctly, we would like to 
know how Mr. Alger or anybody else knows what he 
taught. 

3. It is a comparatively recent theory that the eternal 
punishment of the wicked will consist in annihilation. 
This theory has been discussed in the third chapter, 
AVe will only add that this scheme is a confession that 
Universalism is untenable, even by those who would 
like to believe it. 

4. Bahrdt and Less — the first, according to Kurtz,* 
an " immoral and disgraceful tavern keeper," and the 
second, a " spiritless supranaturalistic dogmatist," but 
both "dignified and influential theologians," according to 
Algerf — like Tillotson before them, and Origen before all 
of them, say that God does not really mean what he 
says when he threatens eternal punishment on the wicked. 
These threats are exaggerations to deter the ungodly 
from sin. According to these writers, God has been 



* Church History, vol. ii, pp. 280,284. 
f "Future Life/, p. 541. 



88 HELL AKB BAMKATIO:^^. 

compelled to resOrt to doctrinal scare-crows in order to 
govern his creatures ! But^ as the great Edwards has 
obsetwedj even this strategy has failed, as those who are 
designed to be kept in awe by it have found out the decep= 
tion. !^ This is not even a " dignified hypothesis." God 
has always fulfilled his positive and absolute threaten- 
ings. And the threatenings of a future punishment are 
all of this character. They are preceded by no ifs^ 
and followed by no U7ilesse^. They are absolute^ positive 
and unemiditionaL 

5. It has been hinted by Maurice Lo-nge, and some 
others that the word eternal is not to be understood of 
duration but of condition. This is surely an " arbitrary" 
assumption. Until some attempt is made to prove it, 
no one need consume time in disproving it, Sufiice it to 
say that it is supported by no lexical authority whatever. J 

6. Many Universalists have held that the wicked suffer 
ull tkeir punishment in this life» This world is the only 
outer darkness, bottomless pit, unquenchable fire, undy- 
ing worm, wrath to come, and second death ! We are 
all damned and in hell already ! We are all weeping and 
wailing and gnashing our teeth now I We are gone away 
to everlasting punishment ! The mere statement of this 
species of tJniversalism is enough to confute it. This 
position is now pretty generally abandoned by leading 
Universalists,. The notion most prevalent to-day is, that 
the wicked will be punished hereafter, but not endlessly. J 

Those who hold this view ascribe a limited duration to 
God. 



* " Work?/' vol. iv, pp. 273-275. 

f Stewart's '' Future Punishment/' pp. 69-103. 

I Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 527. 



HELL AWD BAMKA^PIOI?. 89 

those expressions that seem to imply absolute endless- 
ness. 

After thus stating the various tactics by which the 
plain language of God's word is metj we will proceed to 
show that that language does most unmistakably assert 
the future and endless perdition of those who die impen- 
itent. We will derive our authority, first, from the Old 
Testament, then from the teachings of Christ, and lastly 
from the writings of the Apostles* 

But before we undertake to show what the Scriptures 
do say, we would remind the reader of what they do not 
say. Alger says that the doctrine of eternal punish- 
ment is not taught in Scripture in " definite, guarded, 
explained, unmistakable terms."* But we will venture 
the assertion that it is stated in " unmistakable terms.'' 
One ^}m dixit is as good as another* Alger admits that 
nineteen-twentieths of Christendom see the doctrine of 
endless retribution in the New Testament ;f and have 
seen it there for nineteen centuries. Is it likely that the 
one-twentieth possess a better perception of Divine 
truth than the overwhelming majority that is arrayed 
against them ? Will they arrogate so much infallibility 
to themselves ? If twenty men were to look at a treC} 
and nineteen were to say that the fruit on it is red, and 
07ie were to assert that it is black, what would be the 
conclusion ? That that one was color-blind, of course* 
So, there are nineteen probabilities against one that the 
Ilniversalist fraction of Christendom is doctrine-blind. 

But we would like to have Mr. Alger, or anybody 
else, point to us the place in Scripture where it is said in 



^ Doctrine of a-Future Life, p, 527. 
f Ibid, p. 540. 



90 UELh AKD BAMKATIOK. 

'' definite, guard edj explained, unmistakable terms" that 
the punishment of the wicked will have an end. 

1. We are now ready to consider the first argument 
from Scripture. The Old Testament was designed, in 
the main, to be a book of laws, regulations, and pro- 
mises. — Luke xvi, 16. On this account it has not said 
much about the world to come. Warburton and his 
numerous copyers have drawn some very unwarrantable 
conclusions from this fact. While the Old Testament 
deals primarily with the present life, it does most un- 
doubtedly contain direct and indirect allusions to the life 
to come. And a future retribution is not unfrequently 
foreshadowed if not explicitly taught in it.* 

Universalism, in one or another of its ever-changing 
forms, is as old as the world. The serpent in Eden was 
the real "father" of this doctrine. Its assurance was : 
Ye shall not surely die. You may eat the forbidden 
fruit with impunity. God cannot possibly mean what 
he said in his illiberal threat. Sin will really do you 
good. It will reveal to your vision a new world of 
knowledge."! Thus the idea propounded by Tillotson 
was advanced millenniums before him by a beast of the 
field. Job's three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zbphar, 
were Universalists ; at least, in their views of sin and 
its punishment. Froude calls them Calvinists, because, 
like some of the earlier Universalists of New England, 
they seemed to believe in the innate depravity of human 
nature.J It was their theory that God punishes every- 
body in this world in exact proportion to his transgres- 



* John's " Archology," Sec. 314. Fairbairn's *' Typology/' vol. 
ii, pp. 471-491, 

t tSouthwood Smith's " Divine Government," p. 27-31. 
j: Essay oh Job. 



HELL AND DAMISTATIOIN'. 91 

sions.* These were the premises from whicli they drew 
the conclusion that the afflicted Job must have been a 
h3^pocrite. The false prophets, who promised peace, 
prosperity, and happiness to the wicked, were also a spe- 
cies of Universalists. Now, did God approve of these 
ancient teachers ? ^No ; He cursed the serpent for pro- 
pounding such a damnable heresy. Eliphaz, Biidad, and 
Zophar were silenced not only by the patient patriarch, 
but by the utterances of Jehovah himself. The false 
prophets were denounced and condemned for teaching 
that sin is a trivial evil, and that God will not punish it 
with severity. 

It has been shown in the first chapter that the Israelites 
were not ignorant of the doctrine of a future life, inclu- 
ding future retribution. We find indications of it through- 
out the Old Testament. It is plainly implied in Balaam's 
wish to die the death of the righteous. Num. xxiii, 10. 
What but such a belief could cause Moses to exclaim: 
" O that they were wise, that they understood this, that 
they would consider their latter end T^ Deut. xxxii, 29 ; 
Comp. Heb. ii, 13, 26, 35. May this not have been in 
Elihu's mind when he said : " Because there is wrath 
beware, lest he take thee away with his stroke; then a 
great ransom cannot deliver tlieeP"^ Job. xxxvi, 18. It 
would be difficult to explain the following words of the 
Psalmist, except in accordance with the prevalent Chris- 
tian doctrine : " Until I went into the sanctuary of God : 
then understood I their eiuV — Ps. 73. " Deliver m}^ 
soul from the wicked, which is thy sword : from men 
which are thy hand, O Lord, fi'om men of the world, 



* Green : '' Book of Job/' ch. iv. 



92 HELL AKD DAMKATIOlSr. 

which have their portion in this life, — Ps. xvii, 13, 14 ; 
Comp. Luke xvi, 25 ; Phil, iii, 19. The words of Solo- 
mon are consistent with the view which we defend : 
" Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer / 
they shall seek me early, hut they shall not find me." See 
Prov. i, 24-33 ; Comp. Heb. xii, 15-17. " He that being 
often reproved, hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be 
destroyed, and that without remedy.'^'' Prov. xxix, 1. The 
following passage from Daniel is clear and conclusive : 
" And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth 
shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame 
and everlasting contempt^ Dan. xii, 2 ; Comp. Ch. v, 27; 
John v, 29. Malachi says : "Then shall ye return and 
discern between the righteous and the wicked, between 
him that serveth God and him that serveth him not." 
Mai. iii, 18. This distinction will not be fully unveiled 
until the day of judgment, when the Lord shall make up 
his jewels. 

He that will examine these passages in the light of 
their contexts, and remembering in the meantime, that 
those who uttered them were not ignorant of a future 
life, will find that they necessarily include more than the 
temporal punishment of sin. The Rabbins and Ihe New 
Testament writers discovered in them a reference to the 
wrath to come. 

2. As has been repeatedly observed, the great majority 
of the Jewish nation in the days of Christ believed in 
the future and endless punishment of the wicked. Had 
that belief been erroneous, Jesus, the teacher come from 
God, the truth, the light of the world, w^ould most assur- 
edly have exposed and corrected it. He denounced 
many a popular notion, condemned many a popular doc- 
trine, and violated many a popular tradition. But it 



HELL AND DAMKATIOK. 93 

does not appear that he said a word against the current 
doctrine of eternal punishment. Is not this silence of 
Christ enough to show that the belief of his contempo- 
raries was correct on this subject? 

The Sadducees, did not, of course, believe in future 
punishments. If Christ had, in any manner, endorsed 
their unpopular views, it would have been the most natural 
thing in the world for them to make use of that endorsement 
in their many conflicts with the Pharisees. But there is 
no intimation that they ever did this. Hence the silence 
of the Sadducees makes it highly probable that Christ 
endorsed the views of the masses on this subject. 

Thus there is the next thing to absolute certainty that 
Christ taught the doctrine of endless retribution in these 
three combined facts : First, the approving silence of 
Jesus. Secondly, the assenting silence of the Pharisees. 
And thirdly, the dissenting silence of the Sadducees. 

But when we speak of Christ's approving silence, we 
do not mean that he said nothing at all on the subject of 
future retribution. The voice of the Divine teacher on 
this matter was clear, loud, and frequent. 

The Jews had well-established words, terms, and 
phrases to describe the endless punishment of sin. Jesus 
adopted those words, terms, and phrases without intima- 

ied that he was giving them a new meaning. Christ 
came to convey correct ideas. Had he used the popular 
language so as to sanction popular errors, he would not 
have been true to his mission. His unexplained use of 
the current language is a proof that Jesus approved of 
the ideas which it contained. Even Renan admits this.* 



^•'Life of Christ/' p. 243. 



94 HELL AND DAMlS^ATIOlSr. 

Christ has used the most unambiguous language when 
speaking on this subject. It is certain that if he wished 
to teach the doctrine of eternal punishment, he would 
have employed the very terras and idioms that he did 
employ. And it may be safely said that if the language 
which he used does not contain this doctrine, he could 
not, even if he desired, teach it through the medium of 
language. 

We will begin with that familiar but invincible pas- 
sage : " And these shall go away into everlasting {alo)Pioi^) 
punishment ; but the righteous into life eternal," {alcbviov). 
Mat XXV, 46. The Universalists will meet this declara- 
tion by saying that the word everlasting may mean a 
limited duration, and that therefore it does mean it in 
this verse. This evasion would be sufficiently answered 
by the counter-assertion that the word everlasting may 
mean endless duration, and that therefore it does mean it 
in this passage. Alger, following in the footsteps of 
DeWette, asks,with an air of triumph : How does any one 
know that the mind of Jesus dialectically grasped the meta- 
physical notion of eternity and deliberately intended to ex- 
press it ?* Let no one be scared by this question. How 
does Mr. Alger know that Jesus did not speak with 
"metaphysical severity?" He taught that God is a 
spirit; that he is eternal; and thatthe righteous shall in- 
herit life everlasting. Who can doubt that he meant to 
teach the absolute spirituality and eternity of God, and 
the absolute endlessness of the blessedness of the re- 
deemed ? If his mind grasped the notion of eternity 
when he said that the righteous shall inherit life eternal, 



'^ Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 527. 



HELL AND DAMNATIOK. 95 

his mind grasped the same notion when he asserted that 
the wicked shall go away into everlasting punishment. 
There are three things in this verse which, combined^ 
amount to an infallible proof that the Saviour meant to 
teach the endless perdition of the ungodly. (1.) The 
obvious meaning of the word everlasting. Primarily it 
means absolutely endless.* (2.) This word is here used 
in a judical sentence^ where, least of all, " figures" and 
" exaggerations" would be employed. (3.) The antithesis 
makes this passage absolutely conclusive. The punish- 
ment of the wicked will be co-eternai with the life of the 
righteous. 

Our Saviour said of Judas Iscariot : '' Woe unto that 
man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed ! it had been 
good for that man it he had not been born." Mat. xxvi, 
24. Though Judas suffered unutterable torments for 
countless ages, and be admitted to eternal blessedness 
afterwards, it will be good for him to have been born ; 
for the longest limited duration is as nothing compared 
with an illimitable eternity. Nothing is gained by say- 
ing that Christ was here using a popular proverb in a 
loose and general way. He precedes that proverb by 
denouncing a " Woe unto that man !" Judas is elsewhere 
said to be lost. He was called a son of perdition, John 
xvii, 12. Proverb or no proverb, Jesus meant what he 
said when he declared that it had been good for his be- 
trayer never to have been born. 

The Scriptures teach most clearly that no one can ba 
saved until his sins are forgiven. But it is said of those 
who sin against the Holy Ghost that they shall never be 



* Passow, Schleusner, Liddell Scott, Groves, Moses Stuart. 



96 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

forgiven, neither in this world, nor in that which is to 
come. Mat. xii, 31, 32. They are in danger of eternal 
damnation ; or, according to Lachman, Griesbach and 
Tischendorf, eternal sin, Mark iii, 28, 29. From this it 
is evident that the forgiveness of some sins will be for- 
ever impossible.* It follows that some will be forever 
lost. " Woe unto you that are rich : for ye have received 
your consolation.'^'^ Luke vi. 24. If there is to be a restor- 
ation from hell these words are untrue. 

The explicit and positive declarations of Christ on 
this subject are very numerous. We can cite but a few 
of them : " And the last state of that man is worse than 
the first." — Mat. xii, 45. " What is a man profited if he 
shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul ?" — Mat. 
xvi, 26. " It is better for thee to enter into life halt or 
maimed, ratlier than having two hands or two feet, to be 
cast into everlasting fire^ — Mat. xviii, 8. " Where their 
worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." — Mark 
ix, 44. '' Strive to enter in at the strait gate : for many, 
I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not he ahle^ 
— Luke xiii, 24. "I go my way, and ye shall seek me, 
and shall die in your sins : whither I go^ ye cannot come^^^ — 
John viii, 21, 24. "For I say unto you, that none of 
those men which were bidden, shall taste of my supper.''^ 
— Luke xiv, 24. "For God so loved the world, that he 
gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in 
him, should not perish^ but have everlasting life." — John 
iii, 16. " He that believeth not the Son^shall not see life ; 
but the wrath of God ahideth on him^ — John iii, 36. He 
that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved ; hut he that 
helieveih not shall he damned^ — Mark xvi, 16. 



*Fairbairn's " Typology," vol. ii, p. 327. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 97 

We may further infer that Christ did not preach 
universal salvation from the effects of his discourses on 
liis hearers. If he had taught that doctrine, how was it 
that his teachings suggested such questions as, "Lord, 
are there /ew; that be saved ?" "Who then can be saved ?" 
Mat. xix, 25 ; Luke xiii, 23 ; xviii, 26. Who ever thought 
of such questions on liearing a Universalist sermon ? But 
on the supposition that Christ taught the orthodox 
doctrine they are perfectly natural. 

We are taught in the word of God that Christ came 
into the world to save sinners. The very name Jesus 
signifies this. Mat. i, 2 1. Again and again is he called 
a Saviour. But/rom what does he save ? From sin in 
its nature and consequences. It is said in the Gospel 
that he saves us from destruction of both soul and body 
in hell. Mat. xxiii, 33. He came to build a church 
against which the gates of hell should not prevail. Mat. 
xvi, 1 8. The victory of the cross is represented by the 
sacred writers as a victory over hell. But what is hell ? 
It must be something. The Son of God would not cer- 
tainly suffer death to save men from nothing. Should it 
be asserted that by hell is meant everlasting punishment, 
the Universalist will insist that the Scriptures do not 
mention such a thing. And should it be still claimed 
that the Avord hell designates the punishment due to sin, 
the Universalist will deny that anybody is saved from it. 
Universalism knows no such thing as remission. It 
teaches that every sin must be punished fully, either in 
this world or the next. Some will say that by hell is 
meant the correction and curative inflictions of God. 
Then hell is another name for the Divine chastisements. 
But observe the result of this. It is undeniable that 
everybody in this world is more or less a sufferer ; or, ac- 



98 HELL Al^D DAMlS^ATIOlSr. 

cording to Universalism, everybody is a SLibje3t of 
chastisement. And we are told that the Father often 
chastens severest those whom he loves most : " Whom 
the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son 
whom he receiveth," — Heb. xii, 6. Here we are : if 
Universalism be true, the life, death, resurrection, and 
intercession of Christ do not save any, not even the 
dearest children of God, from hell ! That system which 
assures salvation to all really denies it to all.* Thus 
Universalism is disproved by a reductio ad ahsurdum^ if 
there ever was an instance of such a disproof. 

3. The disciples of Christ have said much on this 
question. We can only select a few sentences from their 
various writings. The Epistle to the Hebrews contains 
many clear utterances on this subject. — See Ch. ii, 3. 
In Ch. vi, 2, mention is made of the doctrine of eternal 
judgment. This eternal judgment may mean that 
the sentence of the judgment-day will be irreversi- 
ble and final ; or it may have conveyed the same idea to 
those addressed as the words " eternal punishment" con- 
vey to us. The original will admit of either meaning. 
In the following verses it is said that it is impossible for 
those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the 
heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy 
Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the pow- 
ers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew 
them again unto repentance.— Heb, vi, 4-6. Where repent- 
ance will be impossible, salvation will be impossible too ; 
for it is a cardinal doctrine of Scripture that repentance 
is indispensable for salvation. In the eighth verse of the 
same chapter it is said that that which beareth thorns 



• Rice and Pingrees Debate, pp. 75, 76, 414. 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 99 

and briers is rejected^ and is nigh unto cursing ; whose end 
is to be burned. Again : " If we sin wilfully after that 
we have received the knowledge of the truth, there 
remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful 
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation^ w4iich shall 
devour the adversaries." — Heb. x, 26-31. Where there 
will be no sacrifice for sins there can be no deliverance 
from the efiects and consequences of sin. We will make 
but one more citation from this Epistle : " For our God 
is a consuming fire." — Heb. xii, 29 ; Comp. Deut. iv, 24. 
The original w^ord for consuming {KaravaAiaKov) cannot 
mean a purifying fire. It never does in the Greek classics 
or Septuagint. It means simply complete destruction. 

If language be not deceitful above all things, Paul 
believed in the irreparable perdition of the ungodly. 
Alger admits this, and attributes the fact to the precon- 
ceived notions of the Apostle.* But no man was ever 
more revolutionized than Paul was in feeling and doctrine. 
No careful student of his character can believe that he was 
governed by his old, Jewish prejudices after his conver- 
sion. It was because he had abandoned those prejudices 
that he was so unpopular with the Jews. Now listen 
to some of the enunciations of this most learned of the 
Apostles : " Who shall be punished with everlasting destruc- 
tion from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of 
his power." — 2 Thes. i, 9. "'Whose end is destruction." — 
Phil, iii, 19. " To the one we are the savor of death unto 
death ; and to the other the savor of life unto life. And 
who is sufiicient for these things?" — 2 Cor. ii, 16. This 
last sentence expresses the feeling of a soul pressed 
down by the weight of eternal destinies. A Univer- 



* Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 265, 266. 



100 HELL AKD DAMNATIOJST. 

salist cannot experience such a feeling. See Rom. ii, 4-9 ; 
ix, 22. Peter, Jude, and John have taught the same doc- 
trine in the most forcible terms contained in that most 
forcible language — -the Greek. " To whom the mist of 
darkness is reserved forever,'*'^ — 2 Peter ii, 17. " To whom 
is reseiwed the blackness of darkness /b^'^ver." — -Jude 13. 
" And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up/o?^ ever 
and everP — Rev. xiv, 11, "The beast and the false 
prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and 
ever.^'* — Rev. xx, 10. John speaks of a sin for which it 
is useless to pray. "There is a sin unto death: I do 
not say that ye shall iJt'ay for it. — 1 John v, 16. Does 
this not imply the hopeless perdition of all who are 
guilty of that sin ? " He that overcometh, the same shall 
be clothed in white raiment ; and I will not blot his 
name out of the book of life. ^' — Rev. iii, 5. Does this 
not imply that the name of him who does not overcome 
shall be blotted out ? Who will re-enter the name that 
God has erased ? Within a few verses of the close of 
the Bible we find these awful words: "He that is un- 
just, let him be unjust still : and he which is filthy, let 
him be filthy still." — Rev. xxii, 11. Thus drops the 
black curtain of despair over the doom of the damned ! 

In addition to these plain words of the Apostles, we 
have the effects of their preaching to show us that they 
did not preach universal salvation. If Peter had con- 
veyed the impression on the day of Pentecost that every- 
body will certainly be saved sometime, is it at all likely 
that that multitude would have cried out with fear and 
anguish : " Men and brethren^ what shall we do .^" If 
Paul and Silas had preached the final restoration of all, 
to the Philippian jailer, is it probable that he would 
have come to them, running, kneeling at their feet, and 



HELL AND DAMIs'ATIOlS". 101 

crying in agony of soul : Sirs^ to hat must J do to be 
saved? If Paul, as he reasoned before Felix, of the judg- 
ment to come, had encouraged that vile wretch to hope 
for pardon after the day of judgment, can any one be- 
lieve that he would have trem:bled? Who ever tretii- 
hled^ who ever cried under a Universalist discourse, 
"What shall I do to be saved f Alger refers rather 
sneeringly to the fact that the hearers of Jonathan 
Edwards seized their pews and grasped the pillars as he 
preached that solemn sermon, entitled : " Sinners in the 
hands of an angry God." But we would ask, Who re- 
sembles the Apostles most closely in the effect of their 
preaching — John Foster, Jeremy Taylor, and Jonathan 
Edwards, or such men as Hosea Ballon, James Freeman 
Clarke, and William Rann Seville Alger ? If similar 
causes produce similar effects, it is very plain that the 
orthodox doctrine is the Apostolic doctrine. 

But the argument from Scripture is inexhaustible. 
What we have said is only an intimation of much more 
that might be proven from the same authority. We 
must conclude wuth a word or two that shall be sug- 
gestive rather than argumentative. 

1. God's treatment of the finally impenitent does not 
look as if his gracious purposes'were still continued to- 
ward them. He is said to rain snares upon them ; to 
cast them from His presence ; to whet his sword to slay 
them ; to pour his w^rath upon them without mixture ; 
to cast them away as stubble or tares; to trample them 
under his feet ; to exclude them from the marriage- 
supper of the Lamb. Such expressions as these are not 
even hemmed with a ray of hope. They can mean 
nothing bat the blackness of darkness forever. 

2. The words employed to describe the destiny of the 



102 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

unbelieving are as black as Despair itself. They are 
said to be castaway, consumed, cursed, damned, de- 
stroyed, devoured, burned up, lost, perished, reprobate, 
and the like. Such words as these can have but one 
significance : That the loss of [the impenitent dead is irre- 
parable. 

3. The same conclusion is inferrible from the manner 
in which Christ and His disciples made their appeals to 
the ungodly. John the Baptist warned men to flee 
from the wrath to come. Jesus wept over the doomed 
Jerusalem. The Apostles traversed sea and land to 
urge everybody every where to immediate repentance* 
Paul besought men in Christ's stead to be reconciled to 
God. He refers to the present life as if it were the only 
state of probation. He says repeatedly : " Now is the 
accepted time. Now is the day of salvation. To-day 
if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts." It is 
certain that, if the Apostles did believe that there will 
be no salvation after death, they would have acted pre- 
cisely as they did. They were evidently actuated by a 
soul-deep conviction that the ungodly may despise the 
appeals of mercy, die without God, and consequently 
without hope, and feel forever after the gloomy signifi- 
cance of those awful words — Too late ! 

Literature. — Augustine, De Civ Dei Leih xsi. Rice and 
VmgxQfd'^ Debate. George; Unimrsalism not of the Bible. Presi- 
dent Edwards' Sermons and Miscellanies. The Younger Ed- 
wards' Reply to Ghauncey. The ^two latter are unanswerable* 
They have been abused by many, but refuted by none. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

Eternal Punishment Proved from the Doom of the Fallen 
Angels^ and from the Iv finite Evil of Sin. 

There are two more arguments which we wish to pre- 
sent on this solemn subject. The first is based on the 
" doom of the fallen angels ;" and the second, on the 
" infinite evil of sin." We will consider them briefly in 
this order. 

Rationalists, semi-Rationalists, and infidels generally, 
from Julius Mtiller, Horace Bushnell, W. R. Alger, J. 
Freeman Clarke, clear down to Strauss, Renan, Tom. 
Paine, and the blackguard theologians of such publica 
tions as the Boston Investigator ^ and Y. Drych^ deny the 
personality of the devil. We will endeavor to show 
that this denial is made in the face of the clear testi- 
mony of Scripture. 

1. Experience — Hume's crucial test in everything — 
instead of contradicting, rather corroborates the suppo- 
sition that an unseen suggester of evil exists to disturb 
the human soul. Wicked thoughts often spring up in 
our minds independently of our volitions and excogita- 
tions. And they come at times when we least desire 
their presence. They cannot come from God ; for noth- 
ing but good can proceed from him. Xor are they the 
fruit of our own thinking ; for they often come so unex- 
pectedly that they surprise and shock us. It is not 
irrational to suppose that those evil thoughts are the 
suggestions of a personal tempter, coming, in some mys- 



104 HELL A^D DAMlSTATIOIsr. 

terious way, in contact with our minds.* Comp. Job 
vii, 14 ; John xiii, 2; Eph. vi, 16. 

2. The general language of Scripture conveys the im- 
pression that Satan is a personal being. This is not 
disproved by the fact that men have been called, devil, 
or Satan, any more than the existence of a Supreme 
Being is disproved by the fact that men, and even 
graven images have been called gods. Personal attri- 
butes and personal actions are ascribed to the fallen 
angels. James ii, 19; 2 Pet. ii, 4. It could be shown 
that the names Jehovah, Jesus, Gabriel, Moses, Solo- 
mon, David, Isaiah, Paul, Peter, etc., etc., represent 
mere abstract principles, on precisely the same ground 
that it is claimed that the word devil, or demon, is only 
a name for personified evil. 

3. It is undeniable that the masses of the Jews, in the 
days of Christ, believed in the personality of demons. 
Jesus never said a word to discountenance or disapprove 
that belief. He sanctioned and confirmed it by word 
and deed. If Jesus was a correcter of errors and a 
teacher of truth, it must be true that demons are per- 
sonal beings. 

4. An argument which any Greek scholar can appre- 
ciate may be based on the name given to Satan or the 
devil in Mat. iv, 3. That name is 6 ireLpd^ov. This is a 
participial noun, derived from the verb Treipd^o). Now 
there are two independent ways in which this name evi- 
dences the personality of the devil. First, leaving out 
of consideration every place where Satan or some 
synomym is the subject of this predicate verb, we find 
on consulting the Greek concordance that Treipa^o, in the 



* Maurice : '' Essay on the Evil Spirit,' 



HELL AND DAMNATIOlSr, 105 

active voice, both as a verb and as a participle, always 
expresses the action of an undeniably personal being. 
There is only one instance that can possibly be cited 
as an exception. Rev. iii, 10. But this is really no ex- 
ception. By the " hour of temptation" referred to, was 
meant the persecution of enemies. It is so explained by 
commentators generally. This verb is used in the ac- 
tive voice about twenty -one times in the New Testa- 
ment, With one exception, it is the predicate or the 
adjunct of personal nouns or pronouns expressly men- 
tioned or implied. In the one apparently exceptional 
case persons are particularly meant. 

Now the participle rrecpd^oiu is in the active voice in the 
passage under consideration. Is it not begging the 
question to assume that it does not prove personality 
where Satan is the subject or synonym, where it is used 
only with personal nouns or their representatives in 
every other connection ? 

The same conclusion may be reached in another way, 
6 'KupdC,Giv is a participial noun in the masculine gender. 
There are hundreds of nouns of this kind in the New 
Testament, Unless this one be an exception, they are 
all of a personal character. They do not, in a single in- 
stance, refer to personified principles or attributes. They 
always point to, or stand upon self-conscious, intelligent, 
accountable personality. If a participial noun itt the mas- 
culine gender and active voice, signifies personality in 
every other relation, we may fairly presume that this 
kind of noun is a proof of personality in its relation to 
the devil. 

5. Jesus was tempted of the devil. If the devil is 
not a personal being, there must have been corruption, 
lust, or sin in the Saviour^s heart. And Universalists 



106 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

have asserted that such was the fact.* But the Scri{> 
tures teach that Jesus was the Holy Thing (Luke i, 35) ; 
that he was holy, harmless, unclefiled, and absolutely 
without sin. Heb. iv, 15 ; vi, 26 ; Is. liii, 9, Hence his 
temptation must have been from without. And this is 
confirmed by the language of Matthew. It is said that 
the tempter came to Jesus without going into him ; and 
went from him without going from within him. Thus, 
the language of the Gospel, as well as the absolute sin- 
lessness ol Jesus, shows that his temptation was by a 
personal being.f 

6. It is implied in the history of the first temptation, 
that evil, or sin, was in existence before our first parents 
had sinned, or even thought of sinning. Comp. John 
viii, 44 ; Rev. xii, 9 ; xx, 2. The serpent was an objec- 
tive tempter ; for Eve referred to it precisely as Adam 
referred to her as the instigator to disobedience. Thus, 
evil was in existence before it had a place in the human 
heart. But evil or sin cannot exist apart from person- 
ality. There can be no lie without a liar ; no murder 
without a murderer ; no sin without a sinner. This is 
self-evident. But if evil existed before Adam and Eve 
had become sinners ; and if evil cannot exist apart from 
personality, it follows that there was an evil one, or a 
devil, in existence previous to the fall. 

'Z. According to the Scriptures, that which is called 
" devil" has changed its character, Jesus says " that he 
abode not in the truth." — John viii, 44. This implies 
that he was at one time in the truth. Peter says that 



* Ballou on " Atonement," pp. 45, 46. " Common Sense in 
Religion," p. 175. 

f Ullman*s " SinlessnesKS of Jesus,'' pp. 264-291. 



HELL AND DAMNATION, 107 

"God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them 
dowm to hell, and delivered them into darkness, to be 
reserved unto judgment." — 2 Pet. ii, 4. This imj)lies 
that the fallen angels have been sinless, in a state of 
heavenly exaltation, in a region of light, and free from 
condemnation. Jude says they kept not their first estate. 
This implies that their present condition is not that in 
which they were created. The devil is repeatedly repre 
Rented as a falleri being. 

But if Satan has thus changed his character, he must 
be a person, since a personified principle could not undergo 
such a change. Lie was always lie. Lust was always 
lust* Sin was always sin. A principle of evil can never 
have been a principle of good. The fact that the 
devil and his angels have changed their character, apos- 
tatized, fallen, is a positive proof that they are personal 
beings. 

This doctrine of a personal devil is attended by no 
very special difiiculties. It is not more incredible that 
sin could originate in a holy angel, in a holy heaven, than 
that it could originate in a holy Adam, in a holy Eden. 
It is not a greater wonder that wicked spirits should be 
permitted to tempt men to sin than that wicked men should 
be permitted to tempt one another to sin. As to the ubi- 
quity of Satan there is no special difiiculty. No one claims 
that he is obsolutely omnipresent. He carries on his 
work, to a great extent, through the agency of his fol- 
lowers. He may^ too, have a power of locomotion that 
makes him practically omnipresent among the children 
of men. No man can tell hoio he influences human 
souls. But he that believes in the influences of the Holy 
Spirit now, or in angelic communication formerly (Dan, 
X, 10-21), can find nothing incredible here. The fact of 



108 HELL AND' DAMNATION 

the existence of fallen angels is undeniable^ if we receive 
the testimony of Scripture. 

But what is to be the destiny of this " critical" and 
" chemical" angel, as J\ Freeman Clarke calls him ? 
Does the word of God intimate anywhere that he and 
his followers will ever be restored to the Divine favor ? 
No* It does not appear that any provision whatever 
has been made to save them. Christ assumed human 
nature to redeem man. But he did not assume demoniac 
nature to reclaim demons. On the contrary^ he come to 
destroy the works of the devil ; to crush his head ; to 
oppose and vanquish him. 

The Scriptures say in unequivocal words that the doom 
of the fallen angels will be everlasting punishment : 
" The abyss is their proper abode."— Luke viii, 31. " An 
everl^^sting lire is prepared for them."- — Mat. xxv, 41. 
" They shall be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone 
to be tormented forever and ever."— Rev. xx, 10. 

The devil and his angels are, then, personal beings. 
Their doom is endless perdition. But the Scriptures as- 
sert that the ungodly, who die in their sins, shall share 
the same doom as the fallen angels. This might be 
inferred from the relation that subsists between them. 
" The enemies of God are children of the devil." — John 
viii, 44, They are subjects in his kingdom. They are 
believers in his doctrines. — 1 Tim. iv, 1. " They feast at 
his tables." — 1 Cor. x, 21. They are like him in feel- 
ing, aim, and action. James ii, 19; iii, 15; John viii, 
44. It is then just that they should share his destiny. 
And we have explicit testimony that such will be the 
case. ''The beast and the false prophet shall be cast 
into the lake of fire and brimstone with the devil that 
deceiveth them." — Rev. xix, 20; xx, 10. The judge 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 109 

will say in the last day to those on his left hand : "Depart 
from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for 
the devil and his angels. — Mat, xxv, 41. Since endless 
retribution is to be the doom of Satan and his angelic 
followers ; and since his human followers are to share the 
same doom, it- follows that they will go away into ever- 
lasting fire to endure everlasting punishment. 

Our second argument is based on the exceeding sinful* 
ness of sin. The author of man's sin is himsel£ The 
creator of man is God, But man was created free. His 
sin was his own voluntary act. "God hath made man 
upright ; but they have sought out many inventions." — 
Eccl. vii, 29. It is true that we are here met by what 
Van Oosterzee has very appropriately termed " the mys- 
tery of freedom."* There is something inscrutable in 
the co7icursus of the human and the Divine will. But 
it is just as certain as that God is sovereign that man is 
free. Man, being a free, moral agent, is the real cause of 
sin, and consequently of its punishment. But after this 
is admitted, it may be questioned whether there is any 
proportion between even the greatest of sin and endless 
misery. The punishment is infinite : is the transgression 
infinite too ? Many deny this. All infidels regard sin 
as a trivial evil." — Prov, xiv, 9. They deny that it is 
in any respect infinite. Hegel and some others have 
found in it only an unpleasant means of ultimate good. 
Southwood Smith describes it as a blessing in disguise^ 
All Universalists unite in insisting that, if it be an evil 
at all, it is a finite evil — comparatively a " light thing." 
1 Kings xvi, 31. Even Albert Barnes seems to have 
doubted that sin is in any sense infinite. f Is this that 



^ " Chistian Dogmatics/' vol-, ii, p. 809. 

f " Notes on Job/' xxii, 5; and " Atonement," p. 161. 



110 HELL A^B DAMlS^ATIOlSr. 

venerable man was strangely inconsistent and illogical ; 
for his "Notes" afford abundant proof that he was a 
believer in the infinity of Christ's sacrifice, and in the 
endless punishment of the wicked. 

The doctrine of the infinite evil of sin has been 
defended with dubious argtiments. Jonathan Edwards,* 
like Aquinasf before him, has argued that, as God is 
infinitely good, and his law infinitely perfect ; and as 
man's obligation to love God and obey his law is infinite, 
therefore hatred of God and disobedience of his law 
must be infinitely sinful. We confess that we can not 
feel the force of this reasoning. But it does not follow 
that if the premises are false, the conclusion must be 
false too. There is not a Christian doctrine that has not 
at some time or another, been defended with untenable 
arguments. 

In order to understand this question let us try to de- 
termine what the word infinite really means. Literally, 
it signifies limitless. That which exceeds the grasp of 
the mind is sometimes termed infinite. So is that which 
is capable of endless repetition. Mathematicians speak 
of infinite series, and of polygon with an infinite num- 
ber of sides. Musicians have their [perpetual fugues. 
Scientists talk of the infinite divisibility of matter. 
Metaphysicians write about infinite space and infinite 
duration. In almost every branch of knowledge there 
are processes of which it may be said that they may be 
carried on acl hifiiiitum,^ 

From this it is plain that a thing may be infinite in 
one sense and finite in another. Man is of finite power 



* " WorkF," vol. iv, p. 267. 

f " Summa," Pars iii. sup. qu, 99, art. 1. 

X Locke, " On the UnderstaDcling/' b. ii, cb, xv 



HELL AND DAMKATIOK 111 

but of infinite duration. His actual knowledge is limited, 
but his capacity to know is unlimited. Thus the attri- 
bute of infinity, in more than one sense, attaches to man. 
This is a part of the Divine image imparted to him at 
his creation, and which he did not entirely lose in the 
Fall. 

Let us now proceed to show that sin is, in several re- 
spects, infinite. We say m several respects ; for no one 
has ever held that it is infinite in the same sense that 
God possesses that attribute. Nor is it meant that it is 
so great as to be beyond God's control. The simple idea 
is that it is, in several respects, limitless, 

1. If the language of Scripture does not expressly 
assert that sin is an infinite evil, it looks ominously in 
that direction. It is nowhere intimated that it it is not 
infinite. Throughout the word of God it wears the 
apjDcarance of hnrtiensity , In Rom. vii, 30, it is said 
that sin by the commandment is become exceeding 
sinful. Phrases similar to the one rendered exceeding, 
(Kad'v7r£G[3o?.rjv), in this passage, undoubtedly mean infinite 
elsewhere. Take for example the following : '' And by 
their prayer for you, which long after you, for the exceed- 
ing grace of God in you." — 2 Cor. ix, 14. "And what 
is the exceeding greatness of his power." — Eph. i, 19. 
" That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding 
riches of his grace, in his kindness towards ns, through 
Christ Jesus." Eph. ii, 7; Comp.l Cor. xii, 31; 2 Cor. iv, 17. 
In these passages the word " exceeding," evidently means 
infinite. The same word may then have as extensive a 
meaning where it is declared that sin is exceeding sinful. 
Elihu asked Job: "Is not thy wickedness great? and 
thine iniquities infinite .^" — Job. xxii, 5. AVhat right 
have we to limit a word whose literal signification is 



112 HELL AND DAMNATIOK, 

tmlimiied? Where is the Scriptural warrant for this 
abridgement ? Does God exaggerate the praise of his 
grace, or the dispraise of sin ? JSTo. The Lord would 
not represent himself better, nor man worse than he 
really is. 

2. We think that it has been shown in the sixth chap- 
ter, that sin may be of infinite duration. Should this 
be true, it will be infinite in the sense that the infinity of 
Its punishment is most frequently objected to. Along 
with that infinity of duration there may be different de- 
grees of intensity. But endless continuance in sin in any 
degree would be an absolutely infinite evil 

3. It appears that sin is an infinite evil from its effects 
on the sinner. Its demerit is such as to justify the 
instantaneous withdrawal of the Divine Spirit from the 
soul. But that which deprives the soul of that Spirit 
must be an infinite evil. Sin is a deadly malady. It 
will not, like many physical diseases, run its course until 
it runs itself out of the soul. That which, if left to 
itself, is an everlasting deprivation of well-being, is evi- 
dently an immense calamity. Even the redeemed in 
heaven will suffer an everlasting loss as a consequence of 
their sins. — 1 Cor. iii, 13-15. That must indeed be an 
infinite evil, the expanding waves of whose, evil effects 
will roll on forever over the shoreless ocean of eternity. 

4. It may be inferred further that sin is an infinite evil 
from its unbounded influence as a contagion. Who can 
comprehend the diversified and ramified effects of a bad 
example ? Who can measure the guilt of Jeroboam the 
son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin ? Who can 
estimate the result of even one act of transgression ? 
Eve's disobedience blasted a world ! How does any one 
know that ev&t^y act of disobedience is not as terrible a 



HELL AHD BAMKATIOIsr. 113 

disaster as that ? We do not commit a sin that is not 
more aggravated than that of our first parents. The 
iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the children 
unto the third and fourth generation ; yca-j unto the 
third and fourth thousandth generation^ where the children 
repeat the iniquities of their fathers. There is a most 
terrible correlation and conservation of moral forces in 
human nature. Every human being is a centre from 
which go forth continually innumerable waves of mighty 
influences that are destined to leave the golden strands 
of heaven or break forever against the crags of hell 
The influeiiCe that is so vast and so imperishable must 
be infinite on the side of good or evil. 

5. Sin must be infinitively hateful^ since God hates it 
with an infinite hatred. He loathes and abominates it. 
His eyes cannot behold it. An object of infinite abhor- 
rence must be infinitely abhorrent. 

6. Sin must be in some sense infinite, since the mercy 
that pardons it is infinite. It is true that an object on 
which an infinite attribute is exercised may be finite. 
The universe is sustained by infinite power; but the 
universe, although immense, is finite. But by the con- 
stant representation ot Scripture, all the resources of infin- 
ite mercy were called forth and exercised in the salvation 
of man. The work of redemption is an infinite work. 
" God so loved the world."— John iii, 17. "I have loved 
thee with an everlasting love." — Jer. xiii, 3. God com- 
mended his love toward us, in that while we were yet 
sinners ; Christ died for us. — Rom. v, 8. The exercise 
of all the Divine goodness, all the Divine mercy, and all 
the Divine love w^as necessary to pardon and remove sin. 
It follows that sin is great, eve ) in comparison with God. 

7. If the Divinity of Chrig/ \s admitted, the infinite 



114 HELL AKB DAMHATlOK. 

evil of sin will follow of necessity. If it was necessary 
for Christ to undergo infinite suffering in order to take 
away the sin of the w^orld, it follows that sin is, in 
some sense, infinite. If Christ was Divine; if his humil- 
iation, sacrifice, sufferings, love, and merit, were infinite, 
then sin must be correspondingly great as an evil in the 
sight of God. 

8. Sin is oftentimes mfinitely intense^ The carnal 
mind is enmity against God. The ungodly so hates God 
that if he could he would kill him. He disregards God^s 
Law. He loves what God despises, and despises what 
God loves. He desecrates what God has sanctified. He 
dishonours what God honors. He tramples upon that 
which God has made higher than the heavens. He does 
despite unto the Spirit of his grace. He profanes God's 
name and that of his Son. When God calls, he will not 
answer. A deeper sinfulness is impossible and incon- 
ceivable. We may safely say that the sin of rejecting 
the only-begotten Son of God is mfinitely aggravated, 
deep, and intense. 

Put these things together — that the Scriptures describe 
sin as being in some respects as great as Divine grace 
and power ; yea, even speak of infinite iniquities ; that 
human nature furnishes a strong probability that it may 
be of infinite duration ; that it brings infinite losses to 
the sinner ; that its evil effects on others are infinite ; 
that God hates it with an infinite hatred ; that the exer- 
cise of infinite mercy is necessary to pardon and remove 
it; and that an infinite sacrifice was indispensable to 
it one for it — yes, put all these things together, and it 
will appear at once that sin is an evil great enough to 
deserve an infinite retribution. The cause is adequate 
to produce the effect. 



CHAPTER IX. 

The Doctrine of Eternal Punishment Corroborated from 
History. 

On this extensive subject it is necessary to say but 
a word. 

The history of Christianity is an ever-growing proof 
of this doctrine. The great body of Bible readers have 
always found this truth in the Book Divine. It has 
consequently been incorporated into every creed and 
confession. The Greek Church, the Romish Church, 
and every Protestant body has received it as a part of 
the revealed truth. So general was the belief, even in 
the seventh century, degenerated as that age was, that 
Mahomet transferred it, as he did many other Scrip- 
tural doctrines, into the Koran.* This general consent 
existed most solidly where the influence of heathen 
philosophy was least felt. It existed before the Romish 
Church had begun to dictate to the people what they 
should believe. This general consent cannot then be 
adequately accounted for, but on the supposition that 
this doctrine is clear and prominent in the sacred 
Scriptures. 

Ballon intimates that the belief in endless retribution 
was the result of a decay of religion. But is it not self- 
evident that a moral degeneracy would gravitate toward 
Universalism rather than away from it ? Is it not nat- 



* Chap, vii, et al. 



116 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

ural for the wicked to hope that there is no " wrath to 
come?" and is it not almost as natural for him to assert 
what he hopes ? From our acquaintance with human 
nature we know that it is so. Sin and skepticism are 
the greatest dogmatizers in the world. 

The great majority — we might say the great body — 
of the Fathers believed in everlasting punishment. If 
the lexical meaning of words, backed by the usus loquendi 
of the age, can prove anything, this is absolutely cer- 
tain. We will not give citations nor references, as we 
will name only sucli authorities as Ballon, in his "Ancient 
History of Universalism," has conceded to the orthodox 
faith. Among the writers, who have taught the doc- 
trine of endless perdition, may be mentioned — Augus- 
tine (ob. 430), Chrysostom (ob. 407), Epiphanius (ob. 
402), Ambrose (ob. 397), Basil the Great (ob. 379), 
Cyril (ob. 386), Athanasius (ob. 373), Lactantius (ob. 
330), Cyprian (ob. 258), Tertullian (ob. 240), Mmu- 
cius Felix (ob. 210), Irenaeus (ob. 200), Theophilus 
(ob. 181), Tatian (ob. 174), Justin Martyr (ob. 165), 
and the five Apostolic Fathers — Hermas, Polycarp, 
Barnabas, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome. 

Ballon seems to be tempted to claim Jerome. But 
he covets that which does not belong to him. Jerome 
certainly believed in eternal punishment, at least, to- 
ward the close of his life. Mr. Alger candidly classifies 
him with Irenaeus and Athanasius.^' 

But the main stay of Universalists is Origen (ob. 254). 
He is the stained glass through which they look at an- 
tiquity. Ballou's " History " crystallizes around this 
illustrious name. He falls into the strange blunder of 



*" Doctrine of a Future Life/' p. 516. 



HELL Al^D DAMI^ATIOI^. 117 

claiming as a restorationist everybody, who, in any 
manner, "defended Origen.'' It is well known that 
Origen wrote on innumerable subjects. His notions on 
almost everything were peculiar and fanciful. It is true 
that he, with his teacher, Clement Alexandrinus, be- 
lieved in the ultimate salvation of all, including even 
the fallen angels. But he arrived at this conclusion by 
a system of philosophy and a principle of interpretation, 
which modern Universalists reject entirely. He believed 
in the pre-existence and transmigration of souls. The 
fact is, ancient restorationism originated in the Alexan- 
drian school, and was confined to it almost entirely.* 
This "heretical doctrine" was condemned by the Fifth 
(Ecumenical Council (A. D. 553). 

Irenaeus drew up a compendium of the Christian re- 
ligion as it was understood in his day. In that compen- 
dium, the doctrine of eternal punishment is asserted. 
The construction and adoption of that summary of 
doctrine proves that such was the prevalent belief up to 
the beginning of the third century. 

Believers in universal salvation become fewer and 
fewer as we approach the fountain-head of Christianity. 
By Ballou's own showing, every one of the Apostolic 
Fathers was a believer in eternal punishment I 

This is an important consideration. Barnabas lived 
in the time of the Apostles. Clement was probably a 
fellow-laborer with Paul. Ignatius was acquainted with 
Peter. Polycarp had been taught by St. John. Justin 
Martyr had doubtless enjoyed the same privilege. Her- 
mas lived when the graves of the Apostles were still 
moist with the tears of the Christian world. And these 



* Shedd : " History of Doctrine/' vol. 11, p. 415. 



118 HELL AKD DAMNATION. 

immediate friends, co-laborers, and disciples of the 
Apostles, were all believers in the doctrine of endless 
retribution. This is certainly enough to show that we 
must go somewhere but to Christ and his immediate dis- 
ciples to find the dogma of universal salvation. 

All this is corroborated by Gibbon, who was certainly 
disinterested and impartial on this question. J. Free- 
man Clarke pronounces him as infallible as any inspired 
writer.* In his immortal '' History of the Decline and 
Fall of the Roman Empire," he says that the early Chris- 
tians taught the doctrine of eternal punishment. Hear 
his testimony : " The primitive church delivered over^ with- 
out hesitation^ to eternal torture^ the far greater part of the 
human 5pecze5."f It is not necessary to remind the 
reader that Gibbon included in this the Apostolic age. 
Thus we have the authority of one, than whom there is 
none more reliable in matters of fact^ that the Apostles, 
and their immediate successors taught the doctrine of 
endless retribution. Ballou did not dare challenge this 
testimony of the great historian. He found it most 
convenient not to mention it. It matters not what some 
may have taught subsequently to the Apostolic age. 
What concerns us at present is to know positively that 
the Word of God contains, that Jesus taught, that the 
Apostles preached, and that their believing hearers re- 
ceived the doctrine of eternal punishment. We submit 
that we have both proved it from the Scriptures and 
traced it to the Scriptures. 



* " Common Sense in Religion/' p. 93. 
f Chap. XV, Sec. ii. 



CHAPTER X. 

Eternal Punishment and the Divine Attributes, 
tJniversalist writers endeavor to show, by a reference 
to the many manifestations of benevolence in nature, and 
by garbled quotations, and a cunning collocation of 
Scripture texts, that everlasting punishment is inconsist- 
ent with the Divine character*^ It may be said in reply 
that nature invites us to behold the severity as well as 
the goodness of God. And as to the appeal to Scripture, 
it is null and void in the way that it is .made. By an 
arrangement of texts just as warrantable, it might be 
shown that nobody will be saved. " God is a consumikg 
FiKE.'^— Heb. xii, 29. " He is unchangable."— James i, 
17. "All men are wicked."— Ps. xiv, 3; Rom. iii, 23. 
"God is angry with the wicked every day."— Ps. vii, 11. 
" He will by no means clear the guilty. — Ex. xxxiv, 7. 
Therefore, reasoning a la Universalisyne^ God will save 
no one. Everybody, without exception, will be punished 
with an endless punishment. 

I. We will try to show that the eternal punishment of 
sin is not inconsistent with the Divine justice, 

1. The promises of God prove indirectly the justice 
of everlasting punishment. The Gospel offers salvation 
to all, and promises eternal life to all who will accept 
that salvation. This implies that it would be right to 
punish with everlasting death, those who will not receive 
Christ. No just judge promises, under certain condi- 



* Rogers " Pro and Con of Universalism/' pp, 49-67. 



120 HELL AND BAMKATIdST, 

tions, to withhold a punishment that is not deserved. So 
the gracious proffer of an eternal reward implies the 
righteousness of an eternal punishment. The promises 
of redemption re-echo the justice of perdition. 

2. The hope that we are encouraged to cherish presup- 
poses the righteousness of endless retribution. If God 
is compelled by eternal justice ultimately to confer bles- 
sedness upon all, it could scarcely be said that salvation 
is only a matter of hope. We might as well think of 
hoping that the multiplication table will remain eternally 
true, or that God will ever continue to exist. Hope, 
when it terminates on an infinitely righteous being, im- 
plies the justice of the reverse of its anticipations. 
When the devout soul hopes that God will save it, it 
admits that God would be just if he should not save it. 
If salvation is all of grace ; reprobation is all of justice. 

3. The praise of the redeemed shows that everlasting 
punishment is just. Who would praise an executive for 
pardoning a man who did not deserve punishment ? It 
is for showing mercy where severity would be just, that 
his name is magnified. The praise which the godly on 
earth and in heaven return to God, is a hearty acknow- 
ledgment that everlasting punishment is righteous.* 

4. The fact that Christ came into the world to '* obtain 
eternal redemption for us" is a proof that eternal retri- 
bution is just. No Saviour was needed to rescue any 
from an unjust punishment. If endless misery is un- 
righteous, tlien God was paying a debt when he sent his 
Son into the world to seek and to save that which was 
lost. 

5. The objection — to be considered directly — that 



* Edwards' Reply to Chauncey, cli. v. 



HELL AKD BAMKATIOK. 121 

eternal punishment is not consistent with the Divine 
goodness, is a tacit concession that it is consistent with 
mere justice. If eternal punishment is iaro7ig^ why ap- 
peal to the goodness of God at all ? Infinite righteous- 
ness is a sufficient guarranty that no one will be pun-, 
ished unjustly. When we say that a king is too merciful 
to execute a murderer, we concede that that execution 
would be lawful, 

6. The Scriptures are explicit on this question, "/^ 
God imrighteous loho taketh vengence? God forbid: 
for then how shall God judge the world? Some affirm 
that we say, Let us do evil that good may come, 
"y^liose damnation is jusV — Rom. iii, 5-8. The Apostle 
is arguing in these verses that, although sin promotes 
the glory of God, God is just in punishing it. The 
penalty of the Divine law is death and a curse. Gen. 
ii, 17 ; Gal. iii, 10-13; Rom. v, 12. The law is just, Ps. 
xix, 7, 8 ; Rom. vii, 12. Therefore the curse and the 
death are just, 

II. Eternal punishment is likewise consistent with 
the Divine goodness. This may be shown in several 
ways. 

1 . It may be inferred from the analogy of human govern- 
ments. No one regards our jails and penitentiaries as 
an indication that our chief executive is unjust or un- 
kind. On the contrary, were he to become a political 
XJniversalist, and proclaim a general amnesty, and open 
every prison door, and let every criminal in the land 
loose on an outraged community, that would be regarded 
by all right-minded people as an act of the highest in- 
justice and cruelty. By the common consent of all, it 
is right and good that crime should be restrained and 



122 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

punished. If this be so under human governments, what 
is there to exclude it from the Divine government. 

2. We have ah^eady shown that the endless punish- 
ment of sin is consistent with the Divine justice. But 
is not perfect justice at the same time perfect goodness ? 

3. The commandment, or the law, is holy, and just, 
and good, — Rom. vii, 12. If the law is good, everything 
pertaining to it must be good. Its threat enings are as 
good as its promises. Its penalties are an exhibition of 
as much goodness as its rewards. The everlasting pun- 
ishment of those on the left hand will result from pre- 
cisely the same law as the everlasting life of those on 
the right hand. The Law of God is infinitely good. It 
is impossible for the penalty of such a law to be incon- 
sistent with the wisdom, mercy, and love of its giver. 

It is true that the doom of the lost is terrible to con- 
template. But that doom will not be the result of any 
defect in the goodness of God. The sun is precisely the 
same when it gives growth, beauty and fragrance to the 
living flower, as when it produces decomposition, ugli- 
ness and destruction in the dead flower. The cause of 
the difference is not in the sun but in the flowers. That 
which is good has often a destructive effect on that 
which is corrupt. The Gospel is good ; but it is to some 
a savor of death unto death. Jesus was good ; but to 
many he was a stumbling-block and a rock of offence. 
In the same way, a good law may occasion and intensify 
the guilt and the misery of the lost. But the fault will 
be in themselves. 

4. We have shown in a previous chapter that Jesus 
taught the doctrine of eternal punishment. The usus 
loquendi of his words ; the lexical meaning of his 
words ; the immediate effects of his words ; and 



HELL AND DAMNATION. 123 

the imderstanding of his words by the Apostles, and by 
at least " nineteen - twentieths of Christendom" ever 
since, proves this conclusively. If the meek, merciful, 
compassionate, and forgiving Jesus could teach this doc- 
trine, it cannot be that it contains anything inconsistent 
with the character of his Heavenly Father. It ought 
to be a rebuke to those Universalists who arrogate to 
themselves a sweeter moral nature than is possessed by 
other people, that the doctrine of eternal punishment 
was taught plainest, oftenest and terriblest by Christ, 
the one altogether lovely, and by John, the loveliest of 
his disciples. The man that would to-day, dare to speak 
of future punishment in just such language as Jesus and 
his apostles employed, would be rushed at by the 
" liberal," " genial," and " loving" champions of the 
opposition, and plastered with all the opprobrious epithets 
that range between " theological" and " infernal !'' 

But we do not really need the Scriptures to prove the 
consistency of everlasting punishment with the Divine 
character, ^ye have only to appeal to facts — to what 
God has done and is still doing. For thousands of years 
iniquity has been in the world, accompanied by unutter- 
able woes. Even in this world multitudes are weeping 
and wailino' and o^nashing; their teeth under the washes 
of sin. Even in this life sin obtains complete dominion 
over many souls, making them its abject slaves and mis- 
erable prisoners. The ungodly are now in darkness. 
Now, if sin, and the punishment of sin, to a certain ex- 
tent, have actually existed for six thousand years, and 
that confessedly in harmony with the Divine perfections, 
how can it be made out that that harmony would be 
disturbed by an eternal continuance of the same state of 



124 HELL Al^B DAMNATIOJN^. 

tilings? It is as impossible for God to be unjust or un- 
kind for a second as for eternity. 

What is mail that he should presume to say what the 
Eternal ought to do! Who can comprehend all the exigen- 
cies of his everlasting kingdom ! Who can claim the pos- 
session of all the data that are indispensable to solve the 
complicated problem of destiny ! Who can fathom the 
great deep, or scale the great height of the judgments 
of the inscrutable one ! What is the creature that he 
should criticize his Creator! O that man would ever 
keep before him the Divine reminder : My thoughts are 
not your thoughts, neither are your w^ays, my ways, 
saith Jehovah. 

Let us try to throw some additional light on this mat- 
ter in another way. Let us suppose tliat, before calling 
the world into being, God had created a Universalist, 
with his " noble sentiments," infallible " common sense," 
and exquisite " moral nature" in full play. Conceive 
further that an angel had been sent to be his companion 
and instructor.* Imagine that angel unfolding to him 
such a message as the following : 

Jfy fellow creature : — " I am sent to make known unto 
you what is shortly to come to pass. Our Father is 
about to create a world. His wisdom is to be the foun- 
dation of it. His Spirit is to garnish it. He will finish 
it, and pronounce it "good" — beautiful. He will form 
a being called Man. That being he will make after his 
own image. He will place him in a garden planted and 
beautified by Divine hands. He will fashion a help-meet 
for him from his own bosom. He will constitute him 
heir and sovereign of the world. But he will permit 



^ " Paradise Lost," book v, vi, xi, xii. 



HELL A:N^D DAMI^ATIOIS^. 125 

this human being to fall into sin ! By sin he will bring 
a curse on the earth and death on himself and his descen- 
dants. Thorns and thistles will bristle on hill and dale. 
Poisonous vipers will hiss in the meadows, and huge ser- 
pents will fill the forests. The universe will turn against 
its appointed sovereign. Quick thunderbolts will smite 
him without warning. A scorching sun w^ll strike him 
down. Piercing blasts will freeze him to death. Stifling 
simoons will choke him. Pestiferous bogs will poison 
his blood. Floods will roll over him. Fires will chase 
and overtake him. Earthquakes will crush him under 
the walls of his very home. Volcanoes will vomit a hell 
upon him. Torture and death will attend the birth of 
his children. The world is to be deluged with murder- 
ous gore. The air is to be rent with blasts of groans. 
Eyes more numerous than the forthcoming stars will 
stream with bitter tears. A premature death will sur- 
prise the millions of mankind. Wo, wo, wo, to the in- 
habiters of earth !"* 

By this time the XJniversalist would, no doubt, be 
ready to cry out : Stop ! stop !! God is Love ! I must 
" vindicate" his charactar against your aspersions. " O 
ravings and blasphemies of theological bigotry, soaked 
in the gall of bitterness, encompassed by absurd delu- 
sions, you know^ not what you say." Your representation 
of the Divine character is "narrow," " sectarian," 
"dark," "gloomy," "repulsive," "illiberal," "flmatic-' 
al," "infernal," "devilish," '-fiendish," "orthodox!"' 
It is intolerable to every "cultivated," "candid," "free" 
" independent," unhampered," " powerful," " daring," 
"enlightened," "studious," "dignified," " thoughtful, '- 



* J. S. Mill's " Three Essays on Religion/' pp. 28-41. 



126 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

" philosophical," " profound," " genial," and '' loving" 
mind.* 

Such, no doubt, would have been the language of a 
TJniversalist situated according to our supposition. But 
the facts of nature and Providence have 'given a result 
very different from his theory. Sin and misery did enter 
the world, although God was holy, so that he hated sin ; 
omnipotent, so that he could prevent it ; omniscient, so 
that he foresaw its consequences ; and benevolent, so 
that he desired the well-being of his creatures. If man 
would fail so signally in determining a priori what God 
would do in time, may he not fail as completely in his 
endeavors to foretell Avhat God will do in eternity ? 

There is a far greater likelihood now, sin being an ac- 
tual fact, that God will punish it forever, than there was 
in the beginning that he would permit it to enter the 
world. For a2:es sin and sufferinsf have existed consist- 
ently with the Divine attributes. " It is so in this 
world; why shall it not be so hereafter too ?" 



*For more of sucli liberal and modest adjectives, see Mr. Alger. 



CHAPTER XI. 

The Conclusion of the Whole Matter, 

Hitherto we have confined ourselves to the refutation 
of error, and to the establishment of truth. A tendency 
to irony and sarcasm has now and then had the better 
of us. But the reader may rest assured that it was the 
scintillation of a consuming zeal, rather than the products 
of misanthrophy or bigotry. The writer has a profound 
respect for genuine scholars and conscientious thinkers, 
even when they do differ from him in opinion. He would 
not, however, conceal his heartiest contempt for the - 
large class of conceited, ignorant, shallow, and unprinci- 
pled scribblers and declaimers who now-a-days have the 
audacity to grapple with the momentous problems of 
human destiny. 

Our argument is closed. Let us hear the conclusion 
of the whole matter : Fear God, and keep his command- 
ments ; for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall 
bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, 
whether good or whether evil. — Eccl. xii, 13, 14. 

There is a hell. There is such a place. It is a '' place 
of torment." You may disbelieve it. You may deny it. 
You may conceal it with the dust and smoke of your 
logic and sentimentality. You may hope that it is a 
myth : You may meet the mention of it with a joke or 
sneer. You may forget it entirely. But it exists never- 
theless, a '' lake which burneth with fire and brimstone f 
and it will exist forever. 

There is such a conditio7i. There are lost souls. A 



128 HELL AND DAMT^ATIOjN-. 

countless multitude has crossed the line which hope and 
happiness will never cross. They are gone to the tough 
darkness of the second death : the smoke of their torment 
ascendeth up forever and ever. They are out of view ; 
and mostly out of mind. So are convicts in a penitenti- 
ary. But that does not lessen the reality of their misery. 
Though forgotten by the living, though disremembered 
in heaven, the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth 
is, and will continue to be for evermore, most intensely 
felt by the convicts of the bottomless dungeon. 

Every impenitent sinner is in danger of eternal dam- 
nation, O tbafc the ungodly would consider his peril ! 
How terrible is the risk of living a single day, or of 
sleeping a single night unprepared for death ! There is 
wrath even now. — Job. xxxvi, 18; Ps. vii, 11 ; and there 
is wrath yet to come. — Mat. iii, 7. It is a fearful thing 
to fall into the hands of the living God. — Heb. x, 31. 
Well might Elihu exclaim : " Because there is wrath be- 
ware, lest he take thee away with his stroke." 

And let it not be imagined that only coarse and violent 
sins expose men to eternal punishment. You will not 
escape the damnation of hell merely because you have 
not robbed a bank, pawned your shirt for whisky, rot- 
ted with debauchery, or kicked somebody to death. 

Men are lost through indolence. — Mat. xxv, 26 ; delu- 
sion — 2 Thes. ii, 11, 12; negligence — Heb. ii, 3; self- 
righteousness — Rom. X, 3 ; hypocrisy — Mat. xxiii, 14 ; ^ 
effeminacy — 1 Cor. vi, 9 ; moral cowardice and skepti- 
cism — Rev. xxi, 8. " Hell is paved with good intentions." 
It is made liideous by the shrieks of Balaams, who had 
often exclaimed : " Let m^ die the death of the righte- 
ous, and let my last end be like his!" The angel's 
urgent warning to Lot,, comes with increased force to 



HELL A]S^D DxVMNATIOIS" 129 

every unbeliever : "Escape for thy life ; look not behind 
thee, neither stay thou in all the plain ; escape to the 
mountain, lest thou be consumed !" 

The doctrine of everlasting punishment should spur every- 
hody to the utmost tension of Christian activity. All should 
be diligent to make their calling and election sure. All 
should agonize to enter in at the strait gate. Nor should 
this activity in any case stop with self. Everybody 
should be warning and encouraging his neighbor to seek 
immediate salvation. Mr. Alger says, that if a man 
" really believed the doctrine, and had a human heart, 
he must feel it to be his duty to deny himself every 
indulgence, and give his whole fortune and earnings to 
the missionary fund. And when he had given all else, 
he ought to give himself, and go to pagan lands, pro- 
claiming the means of grace until his last breath."* 
Amen and Amen. 

This is exactly w^hat Christ and those who had received 
his immediate instruction — the Apostles — did. They 
went every where, preaching, warning every man, and 
teaching every man in all wisdom. — Col. i, 28. Every 
minister is commanded to preach the w^ord ; be instant 
in season, out of season ; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all 
long suffering and doctrine. 2 Tim. iv, 2. God sends 
his servants forth to a world on fire. It is their mission 
to pluck brands from the burning. They are required 
to w^ork, work, work mightily for the salvation of their 
fellow-creatures, and that without flagging, until the 
nightfall of death shall usher them to their eternal Sab- 
bath-keeping. 

The doctrine of everlasting punishment should he preached 



'Doctrine of a Future Life," p. 544. 



130 HELL AND DAMNATION. 

plainly^ fearlesslg^ and frequently. It should occupy the 
proportionate place in the pulpit that it occupies in the 
Scriptures. This is saying a great deal. No preacher 
of the Gospel should ever shun to declare to sinners all 
the counsel of God. But there is too much shrinking 
and dodging from this very obligation. Too many are 
more anxious to see their hearers pleased than saved. 
Shame on the man whose vocal organs are so flabby that 
they cannot articulate in firm and distinct tones such 
words as " devil," " hell," and damnation !" Alas ! 
that any one professing to be a herald of the Cross 
should be above his Master in this respect. Jesus taught 
the doctrine of endless retribution. The Apostles pro- 
claimed it. The reformers thundered it to their congre- 
gations. And the mightiest preachers that have appeared 
since their day have given clear and awful utterance to 
it. Sinners need to hear more about brimstone and 
hell-fire. They should not be allowed to forget the 
worm that dieth not. There are no editions of the Bible 
with the " terror of the Lord" expurgated. Thunder- 
riven and wrath-shaken Sinai is as indispensable to the^ 
world as tlie blood-anointed Calvary. The Gospel should 
be at once as lovely as the love, and as terrible as the 
fmy of Jehovah. The impenitent will not seek a Saviour 
until he is made to feel that he is in danger. The sur- 
geon cannot cure a patient without hurting him. Away 
with kid gloves tickling ears itching. Away with liter- 
ary trifling over immortal beings rushing pell-mell to- 
ward the bottomless pit. When will ministerial Neroes 
stop their mad fiddlings over burning Romes ! O Breth- 
ren ! Let us preach as the Scriptures teach. Let us 
tell the unconverted of a hell to shun as well as of a 
heaven to seek. 



HELL AND DAMXATIOX. 131 

We should all live with reference to the future life. 
Eternity ! ETERXITY I ! is ahead ! The mere 
thought of it crushes the soul. VTe cannot grasp it. 
We meditate about it for a moment and are over- 
whelmed ! VTe attempt to scan it only to realize our 
insigjnificanee. The human intellect can do nothin gr 
with eternity. The instant that its finger touches this 
ark of the Everlasting Father — filled with the awful 
mysteries of the Most High — it falls staggering to the 
ground. The dove of the human mind, after all its 
long flights and pensive gyrations over the expanse of 
the Infinite, must come back to the ark of the Finite to 
find a resting place. ' Solemn world to come I Habita- 
tion of the uncreated I Am ! Our poor souls look for- 
ward to Thee with silence, trembling, and humility. O 
for righteousness, holiness, and truth to bear us up and 
to comfort our hearts when the universe is gone, and 
God is all in all ! 

" Lo I on a narrow neck of land, 
'Twixt two unbounded seas I stand. 

Yet how insensible ! 
A point of time, a moment's space, 
Removes me to von heavenly place, 

Or shuts me up in hell. 

God, my inmost soul convert, 
And deeply on my thoughtless heart 

Eternal things impress ; 
Give me to feel their solemn weight. 
And save me ere it be too late. 

Wake me to righteousness. 

Before me place, in bright array. 
The pomp of that tremendous day, 

When thou with clouds shalt come 



132 TIELL AND DAMNATION. 

To judge the nations at tliy bar ; 
And tell me, Lord ! shall I be there 
To meet a joyful doom ? 

Be this my one great business here, 
With holy trembling, holy fear, 

To make my calling sure ; 
Thine utmost counsel to fulfil, 
And suffer all thy righteous will. 

And to the end endure." — Wesley. 

There is free and full salvation in Jesus Christy on the 
simple condition of repentance and faith, " Without faith it 
is impossible to please God." — Heb. xi, 6. '' Unbelief 
makes everything unprofitable to the unbeliever. The 
word preached did not profit them, not being mixed 
with faith in them that heard it." — Heb. iv, 2. " Death 
and hell are the sinner's own choice." — Prov. viii, 36. 
" God does not make the choice for him." — I Thes. v, 9. 
To all he says, "According to thy faith be it unto thee." 
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be 
saved." " For God so loved the world that he gave his 
only begotten Son, that whosoever belie veth in him 
should not perish, but have everlasting life." "And 
the Spirit and the Bride say. Come. And let him that 
heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. 
And whosoever will, let him take the water of life 
freely." 



CHIU SEMINARY. 



isve. 


. 85 


00 


8 


00 


. 10 


00 


1 


50 


2 


50 


8 


00 




25 



THE FALL TLMM 

COMMEXCES 

EXPENSES. 

Tuition pf^r Term — Primary, 

Intermediate, 

Languages, 
Incidentals— Fall and Spring Terms, 

Winter Term, 
Board per week. 
Tea and coffee, extra per week. 

Tuition payable in advance. Board payable for half the term in 
advance No deduction made for absence, except in cases of 
protracted sickness. We advise parents not to furnisli much 
spendin^r nniuey f )r their children while at school. Students 
furnish theij- 'n\ii beddin*;- and iio-Jirs. 

AIM OF THE SCHOOL. 

The aim of the Institution is to promote sound, thonuigh, 
Christian f.ducation. Cxood principles will be inculcated, and 
good habits l)e insisted upon. No student guilty of immoral con- 
duct, or who uses intoxicuing liquors, or tobacco, or indecent 
language, will be permiuted to remain in the school. A close. 
parental .>\^ersi^ht will hi :.x;erci>ed over ill the sch )Ur= X(^ 
pains will be spared to promote the REUGiors wklfare of the 
students. 

• LOCATION. 

Chili Seminary is located at North Chili. Monroe (.'(;untv, X Y. , 
ten miles west of Rochester, on the Buffalo Division of the New 
York Central Railroad. It is in the mid--t of a i>enit'fid fertile, 
healthy country. The vill.i.;e i> Muall. an! furni-lies. perhaps, as 
few temptations ;•l^ any locality in winch such a -school is found. 



The Earnest Christian 



AND 



GOLDEN RULE. 



A MONTHLY MAGAZINE, 

DEVOTED TO 

Experimental and Practical Piety. 



It Opposes Sin in all its PopllaPv Foiors; 

AND ADVOCATES 

Frtt Cliurclie^, Spirituality, Siinptl<'iti/. 

Pl(fl It /ie>^s\ Entlr(^ Oon^^'^-rffflon A> (rod. 

IS snoHT 

TRUE HOLINESS. 



It is not sectarian in its character. 

Each number contains 32 pages octavo. It is printe<l 
in a neat style, and makes a vahiable l)ook, bound. 

The 33d volume commences in January. Terms $L25 
a year in advance. Five copies sent to one addi-ess for 
one dollar each. 

'^^g^ Arnj one seiulwg vs four si/hscrih&rs, vrtfh the niof/f^ii/, 
mill he entitled to one number free. 

Send money order on Rochester P. O., oi- in n regis- 
tered letter. Address — 

REV. B. T. ROBERTS, 

BOf'HESTER, X. Y. 



^'O^^^^^ 






-^,r^nrs^r^^^, 



,^aAa, 



^^,^'^^^^ 



'^ A. Aa< 



^^«#S2s:as. 






aaa^^Aa^A.^^W^.^ 



'W^^^cR^ 



srsmm^j 



f^'^m^^i 



^^;^^.^aa 



^^^^^^'^^A,^.' 



^AAMAa' 






y\,Nmt^rr^^^^ 



fy,^.^r^r:r^Hfr^'fi^r^ 



^S5k*? 



A,^^./;^AA^t^^-0'^^^^^^' 



Wv^^^^"^ 



'Wf\M^^^' 



^^.^/^.^^"^ ^' 



^^'^A.A^/^. 






':'^^AAr^^' 



^i^^^Aa, 






'^;' ■^^^^r^AAr^'A.An. 



^^^^^,,,;^: 



r^AAA^^A^^A^^ 



A/*\^a,. 



^A;,A^,^ 









Deacidified using the Bookkeeper procesw 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologie 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-211^ 






AfS^f\,H^^ 



nm 



n^^^^C^fM 



^^'\/\Af^fS^^f 



.a^aaaOoO^^--^ ^^^ 



-an/ 



^AAf.',5 



A i'l -^ A/?' 



>Aa^^' 









^^^/^"'^C^'^^C^^^C^'^'^, 



'aM^^ 



aaA^Waa/ 



■^W^' 



AA/sAA' 






aa^^^aAa'^u.^ 






»/^AAA^-.r 



A^/*i:^<^A- ^/vAAf^' 



0^^^ 



A^A/^,r 



^,A^a' 



.A^'*^^ 



m^ffrf>^. 



AAaAA/ 



■/^-A^:A,^r^■ >'^AAA.AA^ 












,A/^A^, 



>^ftA/^^' 



^f^Mf^ 



v^A^A 



V;.A'^-:':'Aa 



